{"id":238141,"date":"2009-04-27T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-04-26T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009"},"modified":"2019-02-14T07:15:55","modified_gmt":"2019-02-14T01:45:55","slug":"the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","title":{"rendered":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\nDATED: 27\/04\/2009\n\nCORAM\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE. R.S.RAMANATHAN\n\nA.S. Nos. 321 OF 1997\nand\nA.S. Nos. 322  OF 1997\n\nThe Special Tahsildar,\n(Land Acquisition)\nAdi Dravidar Welfare,\nSrivilliputhur.\t\t       \t..   Appellant in\n\t\t\t\t     A.S.No.321 and   \t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t     322 of 1997 \t\nvs.\n\nJeyamanimadasamy\t\t..   Respondent in\n                                     A.S.No. 321 of 1997\n\nKanagaraj\t\t\t..   Respondent in\n\t\t\t\t     A.S.No.322 of 1997\n\n  \t Appeal Suits are filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act\nagainst the judgement and decree dated 29.4.1993 in L.A.O.P.Nos.9 and 10  of\n1992 on the file of the Subordinate Judge of Srivilliputhur..\n\n!For appellant in\nboth Appeal Suits       ..  Mr. S.C. Herald Singh,\n\t\t            Addl. Govt. Pleader\n^For Respondents in\nboth Appeal Suits       ..  Mr. R. Asokan for \t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t     Mr.A.Sivaji\n\n:JUDGMENT\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tThe above appeals were filed by the Special Tahsildar (Land Acquisition),<br \/>\nAdi Dravidar Welfare, Srivilliputtur against the awards passed in L.A.O.P. Nos.<br \/>\n9 and 10 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Srivilliputtur.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2.  Lands in Survey No.171\/1B of an extent of 0.16.0 and 0.81.0 hectares<br \/>\nwere acquired under 4(1) Notification dated 18.10.1989 and after complying with<br \/>\nthe formalities the Acquisition Officer passed an award in Award No.2\/91-92<br \/>\ndated 20.8.1991, fixing the market value at Rs.120\/- per cent.  The owners not<br \/>\nbeing satisfied with the fixation of market value by the Acquisition Officer<br \/>\nfiled L.A.O.P.Nos. 9 and 10 of 1992 on the file of the Sub Court, Srivilliputtur<br \/>\nunder Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation.<br \/>\nBefore the Sub Court, on the side of the claimants 12 documents were marked and<br \/>\non the side of the appellant 4 documents were marked.  The learned Sub Judge<br \/>\nafter considering the exhibits filed by both parties and having regard to the<br \/>\nlocational advantage and potentiality of the acquired lands enhanced the<br \/>\ncompensation from Rs.120\/- to Rs.2000\/-.  Aggrieved by the same, the present<br \/>\nappeals are filed by the appellants.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.  Admittedly, the lands were acquired for providing house sites to the Adi<br \/>\nDravidar of Inam Chettikulam and therefore it can be presumed that the acquired<br \/>\nland has potentiality of being converted into house sites.  The appellant while<br \/>\nfixing  the market value considered 91 sale deeds and after rejecting 90 sale<br \/>\ndeeds on various grounds has taken into consideration the sale of land in Survey<br \/>\nNo.359\/1 of an extent of 61 cents which was sold on 3.8.1989 for Rs.7320\/- and<br \/>\naccordingly fixed the market value of Rs.12000\/- per acre and awarded Rs.120\/-<br \/>\nper cent as market value. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant<br \/>\nvehemently contended that the data land selected by the appellant is situate<br \/>\nnearer to the acquired land and it has got the same advantages and disadvantages<br \/>\nof the acquired land and hence the learned Sub Judge ought to have accepted the<br \/>\nvalue fixed by the Acquisition Officer and ought not to have enhanced the<br \/>\ncompensation.  He further contended that the land covered under Exs.A1 to A12<br \/>\nwere sold as house sites and therefore the value mentioned in those documents<br \/>\nshould not be taken into consideration and they are also not having the same<br \/>\n&#8220;Tharam&#8221; as that of the acquired lands.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4.  Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents<br \/>\ncontended that having regard to the lands covered under Exs.A1 to A12 the<br \/>\ncompensation fixed by the lower Court is not adequate and the lower Court ought<br \/>\nto have fixed Rs.8000\/- per cent and therefore there is no need to interfere<br \/>\nwith the market value fixed by the lower Court.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5.  Point for consideration in these appeal is whether the enhancement of<br \/>\ncompensation made by the lower Court is justified or not ?\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. It is seen from the award proceedings that Item No.5 land in Survey<br \/>\nNo.176\/1A and Item No.12 land in Survey No.177 were sold at the rate of<br \/>\nRs.1,09,012\/- per acre in January and March, 1989.  These lands are adjacent to<br \/>\nthe acquired land.  Further, lands in Survey No.203 and its Sub Divisions which<br \/>\nare covered under Item Nos. 29, 30, 44 and 45 were sold as house sites at the<br \/>\nrate of Rs.1,75,000\/- per acre in June and August, 1989. Similarly, the lands in<br \/>\nSurvey No.202 and its Sub Divisions were sold at the rate of Rs.1,76,000\/- per<br \/>\nacre in August, 1989 and lands in Survey No. 210 and its Sub Divisions were sold<br \/>\nat the rate of Rs.2,18,000\/-, Rs. 1,64,987\/-, Rs. 3,92,974\/- and Rs.1,49,402\/-<br \/>\nvide Item Nos. 10, 19, 20 and 31.The above<\/p>\n<p>documents were considered by the Acquisition Officer but rejected those<br \/>\ndocuments on various reasons.  It is true that the lands in Survey No. 202, 203<br \/>\nand 210 were sold as house sites.  These lands are situate on the South East of<br \/>\nthe acquired lands and they are nearer to the acquired lands than the data land<br \/>\nwhich is situate far of on the northern side.  Therefore, in my opinion, the<br \/>\nLand Acquisition Officer should not have considered the data land for the<br \/>\npurpose of fixing the market value.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. The Land Acquisition Officer rejected the lands in Survey Nos.177,<br \/>\n176\/1A on the ground that they were sold as house sites and the extent covered<br \/>\nunder those sale deeds are very small compared with the extent of acquired land.<br \/>\nNo doubt the lands in Survey Nos. 176\/1A and 177 and the lands in Survey No.202<br \/>\nand its Sub Divisions, Survey No.203 and its Sub Divisions and Survey No.210<br \/>\nwere sold as house sites.  As stated supra, the land was acquired for providing<br \/>\nhouse sites and therefore the acquired land has also got the potentiality of<br \/>\nbeing converted into house sites.  Therefore, there is nothing wrong in<br \/>\ncomparing the sale deeds wherein the lands were sold as house sites.  It has<br \/>\nbeen held by the Hon&#8217;ble Supreme Court that there is nothing wrong in taking<br \/>\ninto consideration of sale deeds in<\/p>\n<p>which small extent of land were sold when no other material  is available but<br \/>\nsubject to same deduction.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. It is an accepted principle that deductions can be made when small<br \/>\nextent of lands were considered for fixing the market value towards development<br \/>\ncharges.  The acquired lands are situate in Inam Chettikulam which is nearer to<br \/>\nRajapalayam and Srivilliputtur and a perusal of Exs. A1 &amp; A12 would lead to an<br \/>\ninference that lands in and around the acquired lands are being sold as house<br \/>\nsites for Rs. 1200\/- to Rs. 4360\/- per cent, during the relevant period.<br \/>\nTherefore, in my opinion, having regard to the potentiality and locational<br \/>\nadvantage of the acquired lands and having regard to the fact that neighbouring<br \/>\nlands were sold as house sites at an exorbitant rate, the market value of the<br \/>\nacquired lands can be fixed at Rs.2000\/- per cent and having regard to the<br \/>\nnature of the acquired lands namely undeveloped, 25% can be deducted towards<br \/>\ndevelopment charges and if so deducted the market value to be fixed at Rs.1500\/-<br \/>\nper cent.  Accordingly, the market value fixed by the learned Sub Judge at the<br \/>\nrate of Rs. 2000\/- per cent is reduced to Rs. 1500\/- per cent in respect of the<br \/>\nacquired lands.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9.  In the result, the appeal is allowed in part and the market value of<br \/>\nthe land is fixed at the rate of Rs. 1500\/- per cent.  In other aspects, the<br \/>\ndecree of the lower Court is confirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t\tIt is represented by Mr. R.Asokan the learned counsel for the<br \/>\nrespondents that in the Judgement and decree it is stated that 12% interest<br \/>\nshall be added to the market value.  According to Section 23 (1-A) of the Land<br \/>\nAcquisition Act, the Court in every case award an amount calculated at the rate<br \/>\nof 12% per annum  on such market value and it is not an interest and it is<br \/>\nwrongly stated as interest in the Judgement and decree.  Therefore, it has to be<br \/>\nsuitably amended in the decree and Judgement and 12% shall be awarded as per<br \/>\nSection 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act and it is not an interest as found<br \/>\nin the decree and Judgement.  In other aspects, the decree of the lower Court is<br \/>\nconfirmed.\n<\/p>\n<p>kr.\n<\/p>\n<p>To:\n<\/p>\n<p>The Subordinate Judge,<br \/>\nSrivilliputhur.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 27\/04\/2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE. R.S.RAMANATHAN A.S. Nos. 321 OF 1997 and A.S. Nos. 322 OF 1997 The Special Tahsildar, (Land Acquisition) Adi Dravidar Welfare, Srivilliputhur. .. Appellant in A.S.No.321 and 322 of [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-238141","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1223,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\",\"name\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009","datePublished":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009"},"wordCount":1223,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009","name":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-04-26T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-02-14T01:45:55+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/the-special-tahsildar-vs-jeyamanimadasamy-on-27-april-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"The Special Tahsildar vs Jeyamanimadasamy on 27 April, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238141","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=238141"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/238141\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=238141"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=238141"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=238141"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}