M/S NATESAN AGENCIES (PLANTATIONS) versus STATE REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT

M/S NATESAN AGENCIES (PLANTATIONS) versus STATE REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT ENVIRONMENT AND FORESTS DEPARTMENT

The Court held that the notification dated 06.03.1976 under Section 18(1) operated to prevent acquisition of any further inter vivos rights in the land (per Section 20); consequently the alleged second lease dated 20.03.1978 was of no effect as against the State and the appellant had acquired no right to claim damages. Further, there was no evidence that the appellant or owner were dispossessed or prevented from collecting usufructs; the claim for damages therefore failed on merits. Section 14 of the Limitation Act did not apply because the earlier writ proceedings involved a different matter/relief and did not suspend limitation; the suit was in any event barred by limitation. Appeal...

Parties
Appellant / Plaintiff: M/S NATESAN AGENCIES (PLANTATIONS); Respondent / Defendant: State Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests Department
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 August 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave to the Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; suit dismissal affirmed
Legal Topics
Recovery of Damages, Sanctuary Notification and Effect on Rights, Accrual of Rights Under S.20 of Wild Life (protection) Act, Validity of Lease Executed After Notification, Exclusion of Time Under S.14 Limitation Act, Limitation (article 72/article 113), Privity of Contract, State Immunity/protection for Acts Done in Good Faith
Wild Life (protection) Act, 1972 Limitation Act, 1963 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 Civil Procedure Administrative Law Property Law Recovery of Damages +7 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 22 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

M/S NATESAN AGENCIES (PLANTATIONS)

Appellant / Plaintiff

State Rep. by the Secretary to Government, Environment and Forests Department

Respondent / Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal by Special Leave to the Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the appellant had any right in the subject land under the alleged second lease executed after the notification of sanctuary
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was dispossessed or prevented from enjoying usufructs so as to sustain a claim for damages against the State
  3. 3 Whether issuance of notification under Section 18(1) and operation of Section 20 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act precluded acquisition of inter vivos rights after notification

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the notification dated 06.03.1976 under Section 18(1) operated to prevent acquisition of any further inter vivos rights in the land (per Section 20); consequently the alleged second lease dated 20.03.1978 was of no effect as against the State and the appellant had acquired no right to claim damages. Further, there was no evidence that the appellant or owner were dispossessed or prevented from collecting usufructs; the claim for damages therefore failed on merits. Section 14 of the Limitation Act did not apply because the earlier writ proceedings involved a different matter/relief and did not suspend limitation; the suit was in any event barred by limitation. Appeal...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; suit dismissal affirmed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Suit dismissed