H. NARAYANAPPA Vs. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against the impugned order dtd. 22/10/2021 passed in LAC No.17/2012 by the Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Kunigal (for short "the Reference Court"), whereby the application filed by the respondent seeking impleadment as claimant-petitioner No.2 in the aforesaid LAC proceedings was allowed by the Reference Court.

(2.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned counsel for respondent No.3 and perused the material on record.

(3.) The material on record discloses that pursuant to the claim petition filed by the petitioner in LAC No.17/2012, the Reference Court proceeded to pass the judgment and award dtd. 1/7/2019 enhancing the compensation payable in favour of the petitioner. Subsequently, on 28/6/2021, respondent No.3 claiming independent right, title and interest over the compensation amount, filed the instant application seeking impleadment. The said application having been opposed by the petitioner, the Trial Court proceeded to pass the impugned order allowing the application without appreciating that pursuant to passing the aforesaid award enhancing the compensation, the Reference Court has become functus officio and third party claiming independent right i.e., respondent No.3 herein was not entitled to seek impeadment in a proceeding that had stood concluded almost two years prior to the application. Under these circumstances, I am of the considered opinion that in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, which clearly establish that the proceedings has stood concluded on 1/7/2019 itself, the question of permitting respondent No.3 to implead herself as additional claimant-petitioner to the LAC petition is clearly erroneous and unsound and has occasioned failure of justice warranting interference by this Court in the present petition.