Madras High Court

High Court: Dharmapuri Land Compensation Appeal Dismissed

Updated
Jan 26, 2026 11:06 PM
high-court-dharmapuri-land-compensation-appeal-dismissed

Quick Summary: A legal battle over land compensation in Dharmapuri has ended with the High Court agreeing with the original compensation amount, dismissing the appeal by the Special Tahsildar and others.

The Case Background

The case involves the Special Tahsildar, R. Senthil, and the District Collector of Dharmapuri, who were not satisfied with the amount of money given for land taken in Perumbalai Village, Sanarappatti, Pennagaram, Dharmapuri District. The land, totaling 0.37.5 hectares, was taken to provide house sites for the Adi-Dravidar community.

The Initial Award

On February 22, 2021, the Sub Court in Dharmapuri decided on a compensation amount based on the land's value, taking away 25% for development costs. The total compensation was set at Rs.8,35,176, including an extra 15% as a bonus.

Grounds for Appeal

The people appealing argued that the compensation was calculated using smaller, non-comparable pieces of land and that the deduction for development costs should have been 33%, not 25%.

Court's Consideration

The High Court, with Justices C.V. Karthikeyan and K. Kumaresh Babu in charge, looked over the appeal. They found that the Sub Court had reasonably considered how the land could be used and the right amount to deduct for development costs.

"The deduction of 25% towards development charges is reasonable," stated the judgment.

Legal Precedents

The court looked at past cases, including a 1996 Supreme Court decision, to figure out the right deduction for development costs. The court found that the Sub Court's methods were suitable given what the land was going to be used for.

Conclusion of the Appeal

On December 18, 2025, the High Court dismissed the appeal, agreeing with the Sub Court's decision. The judges decided there was no important legal question that needed to be looked at again.

Summary of the Verdict

The High Court ruled that the original compensation amount was fair and correct, and there was no need to change it.

Tags:
Land Acquisition
Right to Fair Compensation
Scheduled Castes