P. ARUNODAYAM Vs. N. KASTURI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the Appellants is as follows: It is the case of the Appellants that the land acquisition for ICF was done in two phases. The first phase acquisition happened during the year 1958. Survey No 57/1A measuring an extent of 13 cents and Survey No 58/1 measuring an extent of 34 cents totally to an extent of 47 cents were acquired.

(2.) According to Respondent ICF the second phase of acquisition took place during the year 1961 in Survey No 57/1B measuring an extent of 27 cents and Survey No 58/2 measuring an extent of 35 cents totally measuring an extent of 62 cents. The table enumerated below would clarify the acquisition proceedings with respect to both the phases:

(3.) With respect to the 2nd phase acquisition of Survey Nos 57/1B and 58/2 totally measuring 62 cents, Notification under section 4(1) came to be issued on 15.07.1959 and the award was passed on 04.10.1961. It is the further case of the Appellants is that the actual possession of the land in Survey Nos 57/1B and 58/2 totally measuring 62 cents has not been taken over. The Respondent -ICF has placed reliance upon document dated 18.11.1959 which is a Land Delivery Report (filed by Respondent ICF) for taking over possession of the land in Survey Nos 57/1B and 58/2. As per Sec. 16 of the Land Acquisition Act 1864, the Collector is empowered to take possession of the land once the award is passed under section 11 of the Act. In the present case, when the award itself is dated 04.10.1961, ICF could not have placed reliance upon the Land Delivery Report which is dated 18.11.1959. Hence it cannot be said that the possession of the land has been taken over after passing of the award.