Boopathi vs Special District Revenue Officer — 24/2024
Case under Arbitration and Conciliation Act Section 34(2). Status: Arguments. Next hearing: 02nd June 2026.
OP - Original Petition
CNR: TNRM010013202024
e-Filing Number
06-03-2024
Filing Number
155/2024
Filing Date
06-Mar-2024
Registration No
24/2024
Registration Date
19-Mar-2024
Court
Principal District Court, Ramanathapuram
Judge
1-Principal District Judge
Last updated 24-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.Boopathi
Adv. Thirunavukkarasu Thirunavukkarasu
Respondent(s)
-
1.Special District Revenue Officer
-
2.Project Director Nationla Highway
-
3.District Collector
Case History
-
02-Jun-2026
Next hearingPending
-
09-Apr-2026
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
12-Mar-2026
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
12-Feb-2026
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
22-Jan-2026
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
09-Jan-2026
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
18-Dec-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
02-Dec-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
05-Nov-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
31-Oct-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
09-Oct-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
17-Sep-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
20-Aug-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
02-Aug-2025
Copy of depositionView PDF
The petition is dismissed. The court found that the petitioner's claim for increased compensation based on market rates at Rs. 2,00,000 per cent was not justified, as the compensation of Rs. 600 per square meter was already determined based on prevailing market rates for the land in question near Nagercoil, Kanyakumari district. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Aug-2025
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
01-Aug-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
19-Jul-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
04-Jul-2025
Copy of depositionView PDF
-
04-Jul-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
13-Jun-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
25-Apr-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
03-Apr-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
06-Mar-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
06-Feb-2025
Copy of depositionView PDF
-
06-Feb-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
09-Jan-2025
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
13-Dec-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
29-Nov-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
15-Nov-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
06-Nov-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
24-Oct-2024
Copy of depositionView PDF
-
24-Oct-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
17-Oct-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
30-Sep-2024
Copy of depositionView PDF
-
30-Sep-2024
Evidence
Principal District Judge
-
27-Sep-2024
Enquiry
Principal District Judge
-
03-Sep-2024
Enquiry
Principal District Judge
-
30-Aug-2024
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
23-Aug-2024
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
12-Aug-2024
IA / Ea Pending / Cmp Pending / CRP Pending / Cma Pending
Principal District Judge
-
05-Aug-2024
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
22-Jul-2024
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
06-Jul-2024
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
28-Jun-2024
Arguments
Principal District Judge
-
04-Jun-2024
Counter
Principal District Judge
-
18-Apr-2024
Counter
Principal District Judge
-
19-Mar-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
06-Mar-2024
Case filed
Registration No. 24/2024
The petition is dismissed. The court found that the petitioner's claim for increased compensation based on market rates at Rs. 2,00,000 per cent was not justified, as the compensation of Rs. 600 per square meter was already determined based on prevailing market rates for the land in question near Nagercoil, Kanyakumari district. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts