GOPAL PADMANABA CHARI Vs. COMMUNIDADE OF QUITOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the award dated 3-6-2005 passed by the IIIrd Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao in Land Acquisition Case No. 70 of 1993 which was a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for apportionment of compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The impugned award rejects the claim of the Appellant and grants the claim made by Respondent No.1. Respondent No.2 in his written statement before the Reference Court made a categorical statement that he has no interest in the property and hence claims no right to any part of compensation payable therefor. The challenge to the impugned award is on merits with a contention that the Reference Court has not properly appreciated the evidence led by the parties before it.

(2.) By notification bearing No.22/174/89/RD dated 13-12-1989 issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and published in the Official Gazette dated 4-1-1990, several lands were acquired for setting out an Institute of Safety and Environment Management for Petroleum Industries of India at Betul, Quitol Village of Quepem Taluka. One of the lands acquired was 9,800 sq. meters from survey No.69/1. By the award of the Land Acquisition Officer compensation of Rs.16,636/- was awarded for the said land. The matter came to be referred to the District Court under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act since there were 5 interested parties claiming ownership of the land. All the parties filed their written statements. However, at the hearing of the reference, party Nos.2, 4 and 5 remained absent and the reference proceeded ex-parte against them. There is no challenge by these parties to the award of the Reference Court. They have thus accepted the award.

(3.) In view of the acceptance of the award by original party Nos.2, 4 and 5, the dispute in the challenge to the award is restricted to the claims made by original party No.1 i.e. Respondent No.1 and original party No.3 i.e. the Appellant. Therefore, the pleadings of these two parties alone are required to be looked into. Respondent No.1 is Communidade of Quitol. It claims in its written statement that it is the owner of property known as OTHIMOLLO' and CHINCHAMOLLA bearing matriz No.161. It contends that the land acquired admeasuring 9,800 sq. meters forming part of survey No.69/1 is a part of the property of OTHIMOLLO and CHINCHAMOLLA . The written statement refers to original party No.4 and one Ruin Tato Vaz whose names had been included in Form 1 and XIV of survey No.69/1 in the occupants' column to contend that the names have been wrongly included in the forms and that they have no right to the property. This claim is seen to be accepted by the two persons by not challenging the award. The Appellant in his written statement does not dispute that Respondent No.1 is the owner of the property OTHIMOLLO and CHINCHAMOLLA . He, however, claims to be a co-sharer of a portion of that property having acquired title to it by adverse possession. He contends that property by name CONDI bearing matriz No.176 is a part of property OTHIMOLLO and CHINCHAMOLLA and covers survey Nos.68/1, 69/1 and 70/10 of village Quitol. He claims to have acquired title to property CONDI by adverse possession since he and his ancestors have been holding and enjoying the same for a period of more than 100 years. The written statement, however, does not set out the details of the occupation of the Appellant and his predecessors.