LAWS(MAD)-2018-3-553

APPAVOU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On March 21, 2018
Appavou Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Government of Pondicherry (herein after referred to as "the Government") has acquired the land owned by the third respondent/ Devasthanam, comprised in R.S.233/3 Nanja wet land measuring of an extent of 0-34-00 hectares in Krishana Nagar, Saram Revenue Village, Puducherry, for constructing the Girls Students Hostel, Adi Dhravidar Development Corporation Office and Office building cum Training Centre for Pondicherry backward class and Minorities Development Corporation. The Government issued notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984, (herein after referred to as "the Act") on 14.01.2003 and it was published in Gazatte No.2. Subsequently, 5(A) enquiry notice dated 18.02.2003 was issued to the appellant and he participated in the enquiry. After 5(A) enquiry, declaration was made under Section 6(1) of the Act and the same was published in Tamil News Paper Malaimalar dated 21.05.2003, wherein the name of the appellant was described as a lessee. The enquiry notice was issued thereafter and award was passed in Award No.4-A/2005 awarding compensation to the tune of Rs.1,17,36,390/-.

(2.) The appellant raised objection and claimed that he is the cultivating tenant of the land acquired which was owned by the third respondent/Devasthanam, under the said award and that he is entitled for 3/4 share of the award amount as per the Pondicherry Cultivating Tenants Protection Act, 1970. The land acquisition authority referred the matter to the Civil Court under Section 30 of the Act after depositing the entire award amount in Civil Court, to decide the right of the claimants for disbursing the compensation amount.

(3.) The reference made by the land acquisition officer was taken on file in L.A.O.P.No.19 of 2006, by the learned Principal District Judge, Puducherry. Before the Civil Court, on the side of the respondents 1 & 2, none has been examined and no document was marked. On the side of the appellants R.W.1 was examined and Ex.B1 to Ex.B16 were marked and on the side of the third respondent, R.W.2 was examined and Ex.B17 and Ex.B18 were marked.