- (1.) THIS is a Reference under the Land Acquisition Act under Sections 18 and 31 (2 ). It concerns an immoveable property situated at Khetwadi, 12th Lane, Bombay. One Jamnadas Vanmalidas Muni was the owner of that property during his life time. The Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Act were issued on 20th April 1957 and 23rd June 1958 respectively. On the 29th of September 1958 Notices under Sections 9 and 10th of the Act were served on Jamnadas. On the 21st of October 1959 Jamnadas died. On the evidence before me I am satisfied, firstly, that he left no will and, secondly, that he died a widower, leaving only one child, being a son, Natverlal, who has given evidence before me. About a month and a half later, on the 10th of December 1959, the S. L. A. O. made his award. Under the award, he has declared that the amount of compensation awarded by him should be paid to Jamnadas. It is an obvious conclusion that when the S. L. A. O. made that award Jamnadas' death had not been brought to his notice. On the 16th of December 1959 Notice of the Award was issued, but even that Notice was issued in the name of Jamnadas. The Notice was, however, served on Natverlal. Immediately thereafter Natverlal carried on correspondence through his Attorneys with the S. L. R. O. about the death of Jamnadas and that he was his only heir and therefore entitled to the immoveable property and therefore to the compensation in respect of the same. On the 11th of January 1960 Natverlal asked for a Reference under Section 18. By his order dated 8th June 1961 the S. L. A. O. ordered that as Natverlal was unable to produce the requisite heirship certificate as required under the Government orders, the amount compensation payable to Jamnadas should deposited in the Court under Section 31 (2) of the Act. Thereafter on 8th July 1961 the S. L. A. O. made this Reference both under Section 31 (2) and has deposited in this Court the amount of compensation to the credit of this Reference.
(2.) A question having arisen whether Natverlal, the son, is entitled to claim and to be paid the compensation as also the enhanced compensation, if any, that question must be decided on the relevant provisions contained in the Land Acquisition Act and the Indian Succession Act.
(3.) THE general scheme under the Land acquisition Act, in so far is relevant for the determination of the present question, may be considered. First, the Notifications under Section 4 and 6 of the Act have to be issued. Thereafter the Collector has to give Notice to persons interested as provided for under Section 9. There after the Collector has to be issued. Thereafter the Collector has to give Notice to persons interested as provided for under Section 9. Thereafter the Collector has to make an inquiry and thereafter an Award as provided for under Section 11. The provision of item No. (3) of Section 11 shows that it involves a determination by the Collector, to the extent he can, of the persons are entitled to the compensation and if there be more persons then one entitled thereto, the different amounts to which those persons are entitled. Section 16 provides that when the Collector has made an Award under section 11, he may take possession of the land, which shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government, free from all encumbrances. It is important to note that the work used in section 16 is "take". It indicates that when the Collector has made the Award, he is entitled to take possession of the property, whether he has by his award decided or not who the person or persons were who were entitled to the property or to its possession and who were entitled to deliver possession. Even in cases where there is a dispute as to the title to the property or nobody comes forward too claim the property or there be a dispute as to who is the person entitled to hand over possession of the property, the Collector is entitled to take possession of the property. Sub-section (1) of section 18 provides that any person interested who has not accepted the Award may apply that a Reference be made to the Court as provided for in that sub-section. The phraseology used in that sub-section (1) id "any person interested". Section 8 (b) defines that the expression "person interested" includes all persons claiming an interested in the compensation to be made on account of the acquisition of land under the Act. A reading of this sub-section makes it clear that every person who makes even a claim to an interest in the compensation is to be deemed as a person interested. By reason of that provision a person, no sooner he makes a claim, must be deemed to be a "person interested", even before he established his title to the claim made by him. Section 30 provides that when the amount of compensation has been settled under section 11, if any dispute arises as to the apportionment of the same or any part thereof, or as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable, the Collector nay refer such dispute to the decision of the Court. Section 30 would come into play when a dispute arises. The dispute can be of two categories: The first category would be where the dispute is concerning the apportionment of the amount of compensation or any part thereof. Under the second category would fall disputes as to the persons to whom the same or any part thereof is payable. On the plain phraseology of section 30 into play, there must exist a dispute and because of the very nature of the word used being "dispute" whether there must be more than one party to that dispute. The second question is as regards the second category of dispute and the question is whether the word "persons" would include the singular. I will advert to these questions a little later.;