1. Leave Granted.

1. The appellant-claimant is aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in C.M.A. Nos. 902 of 2020 and 677 of 2021 as a result of which the amount of compensation that was awarded to the claimant by...

1. The High Court of Andhra Pradesh1, vide its judgment and order dated 22nd December, 2023, allowed a writ petition2 presented by the State of Andhra Pradesh, its Chief Secretary and the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests3...

1. The appellant-claimant is aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court in C.M.A. Nos. 902 of 2020 and 677 of 2021 as a result of which the amount of compensation that was awarded to the claimant by...

1. Heard learned counsel Mr. M. A. Chinnasamy for the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria for the respondent-State.

1. A suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial court, which was dismissed by the High Court in appeal, reversing the judgment and decree.

1. A suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial court, which was dismissed by the High Court in appeal, reversing the judgment and decree.

1. Heard learned counsel Mr. M. A. Chinnasamy for the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria for the respondent-State.

1. Heard learned counsel Mr. M. A. Chinnasamy for the appellant and learned counsel Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria for the respondent-State.

1. A suit for specific performance was decreed by the trial court, which was dismissed by the High Court in appeal, reversing the judgment and decree.