(1.) THE appellant has preferred this appeal chal lenging the award made by the reference Court on the ground that it was an exparte award and the appel lant was not heard in the matter, since he was not properly described and no notice was issued to him before passing the impugned award.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the appel lant relying upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Neelagangabai and another vs. State of Karnataka and others, 1990 3 SCC 617 submits that the benef iciary is entitled to be heard before the Reference Court pursuant to the reference made by the Land Acquisition Off icer for enhancement of compensation.
(3.) THE grievance of the appellant in this appeal is, the Land Acquisition Off icer while referring the matter to the reference Court for enhancement of compensation as sought by the claimant did not describe the appellant properly and consequently notice was not issued to the appellant by the reference Court before passing the impugned award enhancing the compensation. Therefore he prays for al lowing the appeal by setting aside the impugned judgment and award and to remand the matter to the reference Court with a direction to the claimant to describe the appellant properly in the cause title of the reference as shown in the cause title of this appeal .