THAMBUSWAMY Vs. SPL LAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is listed for admission for this day. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the parties, the revision petition is deemed to have been set down for final hearing and the revision petition is heard on merits.

(2.) The source of this revision petition is an order dt. 17.10.81 made by the XIII Add . City Civil Judge Bangalore in L.A.C. No. 886 /1981 on his file rejecting a reference made under S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, B.D.A. Bangalore. The revision petitioner is the first clamimant in the above Land Acquisition case, In all there are five claimants including the revision petitioner. Am of is" them, claimants 4 and 5 were placed ex-parte. They appeared to have filed an application for setting the order placing them ex parte aside. Thai application came to be . allowed on 14.9.81. However, the case could not be proceeded with since all the claimants were absent. The learned City Civil Judge adjourned the case on payment of cost of Rs. 50 and posted for payment of costs and evidence on 17-10-81. On 17-10-81 it was reported on behalf of the Government Pleader appearing for the respondent, that the cost ordered to be paid by the claimants was received. However the case could not be taken up for evidence. The 1st claimant alone was present. He sought for further time. His request for time was rejected on the ground that the case was adjourned on the previous occasion on payment of costs and no further adjournment could be granted for evidence in view of 3 35B C.P.C. and also in view of the Full Bench decision of the Punjab and Harayana High Court in Anand Prakash v. Bharat Bhushan (1) . Having rejected the prayer for adjournment of the case for evidence, the learned Judge proceeding further, rejected the reference for want of. evidence since no evidence was adduced by the claimants respecting their claim for enhancement of the compensation . It is this order that is sought to be challenged in this revision petition.

(3.) S. 35B C.P.C; so far material reads thus: 35B. Costs for causing delay: (1) If on any date fixed for the hearing of a suit or for taking any step therein, a party to the suit- (a) fails to take the step which he was required by or under this Code to take on that date, or 1. AIR 1981 P & H 269. (b) obtains an adjoumment for taking such step or for' producing evidence or on any other ground, the court may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order requirning such party to pay to the other party such costs as would, in the opinion of the Court be reasonably sufficient to reimburse the other party in respect of the expenses incurred by him in attending the court on that date and payment of such costs on the date next following the date of such order, shall be a condition precedent to the further prosecution of: