JAYALEKSHMI B. Vs. P. SUGUNAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Is the Court answering a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ['the LA Act' for short] obliged to make a further reference to the Land Tribunal under Section 125(3) of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963 ['the KLR Act' for short]

(2.) The dispute pertains to the apportionment of compensation in relation to the acquisition of an extent of 2.80 Ares of land in R.S.No.232/14 of Venganoor Village in Thiruvananthapuram District. The Land Acquisition Officer fixed the compensation at Rs. Rs. 1,46,952/- and the same was deposited in court under Section 31(2) of the LA Act. The dispute was between claimant No.1 on the one hand and claimant Nos.7, 9, 10 and 11 on the other hand asserting rival title over the property acquired. Claimant No.1 contended that he has absolute title over the property by virtue of a partition deed (Document No.1801/1972, SRO, Thiruvallom) executed in the family. Claimant Nos.7, 9, 10 and 11 on the other hand contended that they are entitled to fixity of tenure having kudikidappu right over the property. The Land Acquisition Court by judgment dated 29.1.2004 in LAR.No.9/1998 held that the compensation amount is liable to be divided amongst claimant Nos.7, 9, 10 and 11 only. This was set aside in appeal by claimant No.1 by judgment dated 3.12.2007 in L.A.A.No.1189/2005 by this Court and the matter remanded to the Land Acquisition Court.

(3.) It was during the midst of proceedings in the Land Acquisition Court did claimant Nos.7, 9, 10 and 11 file I.A.No.1455/2008 in L.A.R.No.9/1998 under Section 125(3) of the KLR Act. They contended that the question of kudikidappu raised by them in respect of the property be referred to the Land Tribunal having jurisdiction over the area. The Land Acquisition Court by order dated 15.7.2008 allowed I.A.No.1455/2008 and directed the question of kudikidappu to be referred to the Land Tribunal for a finding. This order is challenged by claimant No.1 contending that a further reference to the Land Tribunal is unwarranted by the scheme of the LA Act. Claimant Nos.7, 9, 10 and 11 maintained that the Land Acquisition Court is obliged to refer the question of kudikidappu to the Land Tribunal by the scheme of the KLR Act.