AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This revision petition is directed against the order passed on I.A. No. II on 1-9-1977 by the Civil Judge Chitradurga, in L.A.C. No. 965 of of 1972 on his file disallowing the petition of the K.S.R.T.C. to come on record as the lands were acquired for its benefit. The learned Civil Judge rejected that application on the ground that the K.S.R.T.C. had no locus standi in the proceeding it being not a person interested within the expression ''person interested'' under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. This view however, has been corrected by the Supreme Court in the case of Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd., v. Francis Victor Coutinho, AIR 1980 SC 1118, wherein it is held that the definition of a ''person interested'' given in Section 18 is an inconclusive definition and must be liberally construed so as to embrace all persons who may be directly or indirectly interested either in the title to the land or in the quantum of compensation. Thus, the definition of ''person interested'' in Section 13 must be construed so as to include a body, local authority, or a company for whose benefit the land is acquired That being so, it is obvious that the present revision petition is entitled to succeed.
In the result, the revision petition is allowed. I.A. No. II given in the reference proceeding is allowed. The Civil Judge shall allow the K.S.R.T.C. to come on record as prayed for and then proceed with the hearing of the reference in accordance with law. No costs.
[1980](2)kar.L.j. 307
C.P.C. (5 of 1908), S. 151 - Fee-certificate - Delay - Condonation.
In exercise of inherent powers, it is open to a Court to condone the delay in filing a fee certificate by counsel.