JAVARAYI GOWDA Vs. SPL LAND ACQUISSITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE common question arising in these six cases is, whether the appeal preferred from the award of the Civil Judge, or the Sub -ordinate Judge, in a reference under the Land Acquisition Act, either for apportionment or for enhancement of compensation, in which the appointment or for enhancement of compensation, in which the amount or the value of the subject -matter of the proceeding did not exceed Rs. 10,000/ -, lay to this Court or to the Court of the District Judge. - - - -

(2.) BEFORE the amendment of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which will be referred to as the principal Act, by the Land Acquisition Mysore Extension and Amendment Act, 1961 Mysore Act No. 17 of 1961 which will be referred to as the amending Act, which came into force on August 14, 1961, Section 54 of the principal Act authorised an appeal in all cases from an award made by a Court in proceedings under that Act, to this Court. But the amending Act altered the structure of Section 54 of the principal Act and that section as it now stands reads: '1 Subject to the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 applicable to appeals from original decrees, an appeal shall lie from the award, or from any part of the award, of the Court in any proceedings under this Act to the Court authorised to hear appeals from the decision of that Court. 2 From any decree of a Court, other than the High Court, passed on an appeal under sub -section 1 an appeal shall lie to the High Court, if, but only if, the amount or value of the subject -matter in dispute in appeal exceeds two thousand rupees or the case involves any question of title to land.

(3.) IT is not disputed that in all the matters before me in which there was a reference to the Court either for enhancement of compensation or for its apportionment, the value of the subject -matter of the reference did not exceed Rs. 10,000/ -. That being the position the Court to which an appeal would lie under Section 54 of the principal Act as it now stands amended would normally be the District Court and not this Court.