AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Jayant Patel, J.—All the appeals arise against the common judgment and award passed by the Reference Court, whereby the Reference Court has awarded the additional compensation of Rs. 259 per square metre for the non-agricultural land belonging to the claimants of LRC No. 423/97 and has awarded Rs. 110 per square metre as the additional compensation for the other claimants who were owners of the other land.
The relevant facts are that the lands at village Sujanpur were to be acquired for the project of Appellant Corporation under the Land Acqusition Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The Notification u/s 4 of the Act was published on 26.01.1995. The Notification u/s 6 of the Act was published and thereafter the award was passed u/s 11 of the Act on 25.03.1996, whereby the Land Acquisition Officer awarded the compensation at Rs. 10.13 per square metre. As the land owner/original claimants were not satisfied with the compensation, they raised dispute u/s 18 of the Act and demanded compensation at Rs. 250/- per square metre initially and thereafter, the claim was enhanced to Rs. 500/- per square metre. Such disputes were referred to the Reference Court for adjudication being Land Reference Case Nos. 402/97 to 422/97. The Reference Court at the conclusion of the reference, awarded the aforesaid amount. Under the circumstances, the present appeals before this Court.
We may record that pending the appeals, the Appellant herein have preferred Civil Application Nos. 5875/03 to 5908/03 for seeking permission to produce additional evidence attached with the said application at Annexures A & B and the Index Certificates of the sale instances. But this Court vide order dated 02.09.2003 directed the said applications to be heard with the main appeals. Hence, those applications are also simultaneously heard.
We have heard Mr. M.J. Thakore, learned Counsel appearing for Singhi & Company for the Appellant, Mr. A.J. Patel with Mr. Variyava on behalf of the original claimants and Mr. Soni, learned AGP for the Respondent No. 2.
Mr. Thakore, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant raised the first contention that the Appellant was joined as opponent No. 2 in the proceedings of Land Reference Cases and the said aspect is apparent from the title of the certified copy of the judgment and award of the Reference Court. He submitted that no summons or process was ever served to original Respondent No. 2-Appellant herein. He submitted that since no summons or process was ever served to Respondent No. 2, no opportunity was given by the Reference Court to plead the case including that of leading the evidence before the Reference Court. In the submission of the learned Counsel, it is a serious error committed by the reference court while passing the award and therefore, this Court may interfere under the appellate jurisdiction.
Whereas, Mr. Patel, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents-original claimants concerned contended that it is not a matter where the Appellant had no knowledge about the proceedings initiated before the Reference Court. He submitted that even as per the affidavit filed by Sanjiv Raina, Senior Operations Officer, Sidhpur dated 19.08.2003, there is admission on the part of the Corporation that the letter dated 04.04.1998 addressed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer to the District Government Pleader was received. Therefore, it was submitted that if the Appellant had knowledge about the proceeding including that of the next date fixed, and therefore, if they have chosen not to take any action, for filing their appearance or defending their case, it would not be a case to exercise the discretion of interference in the appellate jurisdiction. It was submitted that even if this Court is inclined to consider the matter on the aspect that there is no proof on record for service of any process or service of summons, it is certainly a voluntary default on the part of the Appellant Corporation and in the event this Court finds it proper to remand the matter, this Court may award heavy cost to the claimants on account of the litigation faced by them in which there was inaction on the part of the Appellant Corporation.
Mainly two aspects are required to be taken into consideration apart from the quantification of the amount of compensation and they are that the requirement to serve the summons or process by the Reference Court to the parties of the proceedings and the another is the conduct on the part of the Appellant for not taking action well in time in spite of the knowledge about the pendency of the proceeding and the specific intimation by the Special Land Acquisition Officer.
We would have further considered the matter, however, the learned Counsel appearing for the Appellants as well as the Respondents-original claimants declared before the Court that in the event this Court is inclined to remand the matter on payment of reasonable cost to the Respondents-original claimants for the present litigation they have no objection. However, they prayed that if the matter is to be remanded opportunity may be given by the Reference Court to the original Respondent No. 2-Appellant herein to lead the evidence and opportunity may also be given to the original claimants to lead the additional evidence. Learned Counsel appearing for both the sides prayed that this Court may not record the reasons on the aspects of requirement to serve the summons in the proceedings before the Reference Court nor may further record the reasons on the conduct of the original Respondent No. 2-Appellant herein.
In view of the aforesaid declaration made by both main contesting parties, we find that if the matter is remanded to the Reference Court on the limited aspect of giving opportunity to the Appellants to lead the evidence and also to the original claimants to meet with the said evidence, which may be produced by the Appellants, the same would meet with ends of justice, more particularly because even if it is considered that there was knowledge on the part of the Appellants and they did not take steps, the Appellants are ready to bare the suitable cost of the present litigation for the claimants. However, it does appear that pending the appeal 50% of the amount, out of the amount awarded by the Reference Court has already been paid to the original claimants, Respondents herein. The same status can be allowed to be continued and after the reference is decided, the said amount can be given set off and/or adjusted and the rights of the parties thereafter shall stand governed accordingly.
In view of the aforesaid observations and discussion, the impugned judgment and award passed by the Reference Court is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Reference Court for fresh adjudication, after giving opportunity to the claimants as well as to the original Respondent No. 2-Appellant herein and thereafter the Reference Court shall pass a fresh judgment and award, of course after giving opportunity of hearing to both sides, subject to the condition that the Appellant pays the cost of Rs. 2,000/- to Respondent (original claimant) per appeal (Total cost Rs. 56,000/-) within a period of 03 (three) weeks from today.
It would be open to the Appellant herein - Respondent No. 2 before the Reference Court to deposit the amount of cost by way of compliance to the condition and after the amount of cost is deposited the condition shall stand complied with, and the original claimants shall be at liberty to withdraw the amount of cost either themselves or through duly authorized advocate.
After the aforesaid amount of cost is deposited, the Reference Court shall take up the matters and make an attempt to dispose of the references as per the directions in the present judgment, as early as possible, preferably within a period of 06 (six) months from the date of deposit of the amount of cost with it.
It is made clear that on account of the aforesaid order for setting aside of the judgment and award and remand to the Reference Court, the Appellants or the Special Land Acquisition Officer shall not be entitled to recover the amount already paid pending the appeal by the claimants- Respondents herein. However, the amount already paid shall be adjusted and/or set off and thereafter the rights of both the sides shall stand governed accordingly as per the judgment and award which may be passed by the Reference Court subject to the right of either side of preferring appeal before the higher forum as known to law.
The appeals are allowed to the aforesaid extent. Record & proceedings be returned to the Reference Court.
ORDER IN CIVIL APPLICATIONS
In view of the order passed in the main First Appeals, as the rights of the parties shall stand governed accordingly and the evidence will have to be led by the Appellants before the Reference Court, the present Civil Applications shall also stand disposed of accordingly.