RISHIRAJ SINGH Vs. RAGHUBAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a Letters Patent Appeal from an order of Shiv Dayal J holding that an appeal preferred by the appellants before us, against a decision of the Additional district Judge, Ambikapur under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act is a regular first appeal and should be registered as such and directing the appellants to state the valuation of the appeal and pay ad valorem court-fees on it accordingly

(2.) THE material facts are that in acquisition proceedings of certain lands situated in village Patna, tahsil Baikanthpur an amount of Rs 7196. 70 was determined as compensation for the land acquired. In those proceedings a dispute arose between the parties to the appeal as regards the apportionment of the compensation. The respondents claimed that they were entitled to the full amount of the compensation and that the appellants had no claim to receive the compensation amount. The Land Acquisition Officer referred this dispute about apportionment to the Court of the Additional District Judge, Ambikapur, under Section 30 of the land Acquisition Act, 1894, for decision. The learned Additional District Judge held that the respondents were entitled to get the entire amount of Rs. 7196. 70 rejecting in toto the claim of the appellants to get any amount of the compensation. The appellants, therefore, preferred an appeal in this Court in which the order before us in appeal was passed by the learned Single Judge.

(3.) THE short question that arises in this appeal is as regards the court-fee payable on the appeal preferred by the appellants. The learned Single Judge, relying on ramachandra v. Ramachandra. AIR 1922 PC 80, held that the decision of the learned Additional District Judge on a reference under Section 30 of the Land acquisition Act was a decree and that, therefore, the appeal preferred before him by the appellants was a regular appeal and ad valorem court-fee was payable on the valuation of the appeal. In AIR 1922 PC 80 (Supra) the Privy Council has observed:--