RAJPIPLA MUNICIPALITY Vs. MANEKBEN WD O CHUNILAL SHAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By a notification issued under sec. 4 of the Land Acquisi- tion Act 1894 (hereinafter called the Act) Survey No. 22/B of Sheet No. 18 admeasuring about 68 square yards and 2 square feet (57/04/27 Sq. Meters) came to be acquired for the public purpose of widening the road. This notification was followed by another notification issued under sec. 6 of the Act on 27/04/1973. The opponents Nos. 1 2 and 3 are the owners of the land in question. The fourth opponent made an award under sec. 12 of the Act on 12th December 1378 and fixed the compensation for the acquired land at Rs. 60.00 per square meter and awarded a lump sum for the superstructure along with the usual award of solatium. The owners feeling dissatisfied with the award sought a reference under sac. 18 of the Act. The learned District Judge enhanced the compensation by his order dated 20/06/1980. The Rajpipla Municipality that is the acquiring body has preferred this Revision Application contending that the award is in violation of sec. 50 (2) of the Act.

(2.) Sub-sec. (1) of sec 50 provides that where the provisions of the Act are put in force for the purpose of acquiring land at the cost of any fund controlled or managed by a local authority or of any Company the charges of and incidental to such acquisition shall be defrayed from or by such fund or Company. Sub-sec. (2) of sec. 50 with which we are concerned reads as under :

(3.) In the result this Revision Application is allowed. The order passed by the learned District Judge in Reference No. 156 of 1979 is set aside. Mr. Vyas for the local authority states that the local authority Will enter an appearance in the matter waiving notice under sub-sec. (2) of sec. 50 of the Act on or before 16/03/1981. The local authority will be permitted to file its statement if so desired within one week thereafter. The learned District Judge with thereafter take up the matter for bearing and dispose it of within on month after permitting the local authority to adduce evidence as well as the owners to adduct such further evidence as they consider necessary in the light of the evidence adduced by the local authority. The rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. Application allowed.