CEMENT CORPN OF INDIA Vs. PURYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Noticing a conflict between two 3-Judge Benches of this Court in the case of Special Deputy Collector and Another v. Kurra Sambasiva Rao and others (1997 (6) SCC 41) and Land Acquisition Officer and Mandal Revenue Officer v. V. Narasaiah (2001 (3) SCC 530), another 3-Judge Bench of this Court on 31st of July, 2001 considered it appropriate to place C.A. No. 6986/99 for consideration by a larger Bench. It is in this background, the above appeal and other connected appeals are now before us.

(2.) In Kurra Sambasiva Rao's case (supra), this Court held that by introducing Section 51-A in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter LA Act) the Legislature only facilitated the parties concerned to produce a certified copy of a sale transaction in evidence and nothing more. This is what the Court observed in the said case.

(3.) According to the above judgment Section 51-A only dispenses with the production of the original sale deed and permits the receiving of a certified copy of such document in evidence. It is further held that the marking of certified copy per se does not make the contents of such document admissible in evidence unless it is duly proved and witnessed, that is, by the examination of the vendor or the vendee.