Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. High Court Of Telangana
  4. /
  5. 2014
  6. /
  7. January

S Rahaman vs Sri K Ram Gopal

High Court Of Telangana|26 June, 2014
|

JUDGMENT / ORDER

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CONTEMPT CASE No.931 of 2014 Date:26.06.2014 Between:
S.Rahaman, S/o Ajeej Sab . Petitioner And:
Sri K.Ram Gopal, District Collector, Chittoor District and two others.
. Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri For Ms S.Parineeta Counsel for the Respondents: AGP for Land Acquisition The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This Contempt Case is filed alleging willful disobedience of order, dated 01.03.2013, in Writ Petition No.39551 of 2012.
Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Land Acquisition placed before the Court a copy of Form-CC, a perusal of which would show that in pursuance of the above-mentioned order of this Court, the respondents have fixed compensation at Rs.5,50,000/- each for the extent of Ac.0.80 cents and Ac.0.99 cents in Survey Nos.135/2 and 135/3 respectively of Gandrajupalli Village, Gangavaram Mandal, Chittoor District. It could be further seen from the said form that a sum of Rs.6,12,180/- is shown to be payable to the petitioner after giving credit to the ex gratia amount already paid treating the lands as DKT lands. Learned Assistant Government Pleader stated that following the determination of the compensation, as aforesaid, the respondents have paid the balance amount to the petitioner.
Sri V.R.Reddy Kovvuri, the learned counsel for the petitioner, while admitting that his client has received the compensation has, however, stated that he has received the compensation under protest as, the same is not in accordance with the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. He has, therefore, requested for giving liberty to his client to avail appropriate remedy for claiming proper compensation.
In the light of the fact that the respondent has paid the purported differential amount to the petitioner, no further adjudication of the Contempt Case is needed. However, if the petitioner disputes the quantum of compensation, he is entitled to avail appropriate remedy according to law.
Subject to the liberty given to the petitioner as above, the Contempt Case is closed.
26th June, 2014 DR
JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA
REDDY
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

S Rahaman vs Sri K Ram Gopal

Court

High Court Of Telangana

JudgmentDate
26 June, 2014
Judges
  • C V Nagarjuna
Advocates
  • Sri V R Reddy Kovvuri