BASALINGAPPA GOWDA Vs. NAGAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) After making an award fixing compensation payable in respect of 5 acres and 36 guntas of wet land in survey No. 2 of Amachi village, Hosanager Taluk, the Special Land Acquisition Officer made a reference to the Court of the Civil Judge at Shimoga under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. Before the said officer the person in whose name the Khata of the land stood, viz, Basalingappa Gowda claimed that the entire compensation should be given to him, the sons said that they were also entitled to a share. No documents were produced by either of them, but it was suggested that the relevant documents were filed in some Civil Court in connection with a dispute as to title pending adjudication by that Court. It is this difference of opinion between the father and the sons as to the person entitled to receive the compensation that necessitated a reference to the Court under Section 30 for apportionment.

(2.) Before the Court, Nagamma W/o Basalingappa Gowda, made an application for being brought on record claiming that her husband and sons have fraudulently made the several claims in respect of this property behind her back, that she having title in the property was the only person entitled to receive the entire compensation and that therefore she should be made a party. The Civil Judge has granted her application and brought her on record as one of the claimants in the reference.

(3.) The father and the sons have preferred this revision petition contending that the Court had no jurisdiction to implead Nagamma.