Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-06 allowed

Er. K. Arumugam vs V. Balakrishnan & Ors

Bench: 2 — R. Banumathi

In Brief

The TWAD Board entered land in Tamil Nadu in 1991 with the owner's consent to construct water supply infrastructure. After litigation, the High Court directed authorities to ensure fair compensation. The Board paid Rs.1.11 crore based on the District Collector's assessment. The owner then filed a contempt petition, and the Single Judge ordered Rs.4+ crore payment at Rs.600/- per sq. ft. The Supreme Court held the judge erred by travelling beyond the original order's scope and using contempt jurisdiction to impose arbitrary directions. The Court emphasized that contempt cannot substitute for regular appeals and public funds cannot be diverted through such proceedings.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Contempt of Court Civil Procedure Public Law Land Compensation Administrative Law

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login