SUNDERLAL Vs. PARAMSUKHDAS
LAWS(SC)-1967-8-29
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: BOMBAY)
Decided on August 25,1967

SUNDERLAL Appellant
VERSUS
PARAMSUKHDAS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) These two appeals, by special leave, are directed against the judgment of High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Nagpur Bench), dated January 7, 1963, allowing two Civil Revision Applications Nos. 294 of 1962 and 295 of 1962, filed by Paramsukhdas, a respondent before us. The High Court, by this judgment, quashed orders dated April 9, 1962, in the Land Acquisition Cases No. 189 of 1961 and No. 190 of 1961 (as amended subsequently on July 6, 1962) and remitted the matter to the Court of the Civil Judge, Akola, for a fresh decision on merits with advertent to the remarks in the judgment. The High Court further directed that Paramsukdas be allowed to be impleaded as a non-applicant in the two proceedings and all parties will be allowed to amend their pleadings or make fresh pleadings with respect to the alleged compromise as filed before the High Court in Special Civil Application No 232 of 1960).
(2.) Mr. S. T. Desai, the learned counsel for the appellant, contends : (1) That the High Court has no jurisdiction under Section 115, C. P. C., to interfere with the orders of the Civil Judge, dated April 9, 1962; (2) That Pararnsukhdas, respondent No. 1, is not a person interested in the compensation and is not entitled to be impleaded as party to the references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (I of 1894) - hereinafter referred to as the Act; (3) That, if at all, no revision but appeal lay to the High Court. Before dealing with the above contentions it is necessary to state the relevant facts. Sunderlal, appellant, owned some land (field No. 22) in Mouzah Umari Taluq and District Akola. This field had been leased to Khushal Singh under a registered lease for 5 years commencing from April 1, 1954. The field was acquired by the Government. The Land Acquisition Officer made his award on January 30, 1960, and assessed the total compensation at Rupees 2B,105.58, and apportioned the amount equally between Sunderlal and Khushal Singh. On February 17, 1960, the Land Acquisition Officer noted the following regarding Khushal Singh : "2. Khushal Singh S/o Tolaram (a) According to letter No. 154/60 of 15th February 1980 from the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) Khamgaon, and the attachment order issued by that Court, in C. S. No. 4-B/1958, the amount to be paid to Khushal Singh Tolaram be kept in Revenue Deposit. (b) One Sunderlal minor guardian father Madanlal Harjimal, of Akola has presented an objection-petition against this payment."
(3.) Sunderlal filed an application for reference under Section 18 of the Act, claiming more compensation and also complaining in regard to the apportionment of the amount of compensation between him and Khushal Singh. According to him Khushal Singh was not a protected tenant and his period of lease having expired, he was not at all entitled to any portion of the amount of compensation. A reference under Section 18 was made on June 27, l961, and this reference was numbered Land Acquisition Case No. 189 of 1961. Khushal Singh also applied for a reference and he claimed enhancement of compensation and challenged the basis of apportionment adopted by the Land Acquisition Officer. The Collector made the reference and it was numbered Land Acquisition No. 190 of 1961.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.