ABDUL JABBAR Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in I. A. 818 of 1982 in L. A. R. No. 57 of 1979 pending before the Sub Court, palghat are the revision petitioners. THE 1st petitioner is the husband and the 2nd petitioner is his wife. An item of property belonging to the 2nd petitioner was acquired under the Kerala Land Acquisition Act. THE 2nd petitioner filed an authorisation dated 12-11-1974 before the Land Acquisition Officer on receipt of notice dated 30-9-1974. In that authorisation she has stated that she is authorising her husband, namely the 1st petitioner, to represent her in the proceedings and everything in connection with the case and also to receive the compensation amount. THE reference application was made on 8-5-1975 by the 1st petitioner, but without mentioning that the petition is filed for and on behalf of his wife. THE Land Acquisition Officer accepted the petition and referred the case to the Subordinate Judge's Court mentioning only the 1st petitioner's name. THEreafter this interlocutory application was filed to implead the 2nd petitioner also in the proceedings. THE lower court held that since there is no reference at the instance of the 2nd petitioner, she cannot be impleaded.

(2.) ON going through the records it is clear that the land acquired belongs to the 2nd petitioner and that there was in fact a letter authorising the 1st petitioner to conduct the case on behalf of the 2nd petitioner. The Land Acquisition Officer has accepted the authorisation and it was due to this reason that the reference petition filed by the husband, who is not the owner of the property, was accepted and the matter was referred to the civil Court under S. 20 of the Act. However, in the reference letter the claimant's name was shown as the 1st petitioner himself and not the first petitioner for and on behalf of the 2nd petitioner. This is obviously a mistake.

(3.) S. 20 of the Kerala Act corresponds to S. 18 of the indian Act and although the word used in these sections is "reference", it may be observed that a reference under the Land acquisition Act is not similar to a reference under the Incometax Act. Under the Land Acquisition Act, the Collector cannot refuse to make a reference in case a proper reference application is made. After a reference the Collector has no control over the file and only the Land Acquisition Court can determine the questions in issue. Under S. 20 of the Kerala Act the objections relating to measurement of the land, the amount of compensation, the person to whom it is payable and the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested are to be determined by the civil court. In this connection it may be noticed that under S. 256 to 260 of the Incometax Act, the Appellate Tribunal continues to have seisin over the appeal even after a reference. The judgment delivered by the High Court or the Supreme Court as the case may be, on a reference, is to be sent to the Appellate Tribunal so that the Tribunal may pass such orders as are necessary to dispose of the case conformably to such judgments. So much so, the Supreme Court has held that the Appellate Tribunal retains appellate jurisdiction till the reference is disposed of and therefore can pass stay of realisation of tax in a matter referred to the High Court. (See C. I. T. v. Bansi Dhar & Sons (1986;157 I. T. R. 665 ). Unlike as in a reference under the Incometax Act, in a reference under the Land Acquisition Act the Land acquisition Officer has no further control over the case and the Court has full seisin of the case. Therefore the Court has full power to pass any order in the case. Since after reference the Land Acquisition Officer does not have any control over the case, it is not necessary to call for a further reference showing the name of the 2nd petitioner also. Under S. 59 of the Kerala Land acquisition Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure are made applicable to all proceedings before the court save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in the Land Acquisition Act. The impleading petition is filed under 0. 1 R. 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure. That rule empowers the court, among other things, to implead any person as plaintiff or defendant, whose presence before court may be necessary is order to enable the court to adjudicate upon and settle all questions involved in the suit effectually and completely.