MEHERUNNISA Vs. GREATER HYDERABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, whose application for her impleadment in O.P.No.80 of 2011 relating to reference proceedings under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short "the Act") was dismissed, filed this Civil Revision Petition, feeling aggrieved by the refusal of the learned I Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad to allow her to come on record. I have heard Mr. M.A.K. Mukheed, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

(2.) In response to the notice under Sections 9(3) and 10 of the Act, Smt. Taherunnisa-sister of respondent No.2, filed a claim petition wherein it is stated that she has filed O.S.No.1920 of 2007 in the Court of the learned VII Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad for partition and that she is also entitled to compensation in the acquired land. The Land Acquisition Officer of respondent No.1 Corporation passed award No.A/401/2007 dated 14.08.2008 wherein he has stated that as there are claims and counter claims and the dispute is subjudice, the compensation amount could not be awarded or apportioned and that, therefore, he has decided to refer the dispute to the civil Court under Section 30 of the Act. Accordingly, the dispute was referred which was registered as O.P.No.80 of 2011 on the file of the learned I Senior Civil Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. The petitioner filed I.A.No.1523 of 2011 under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking her impleadment in the O.P. by stating that she is one of the sisters of respondent No.2 and that, therefore, she is also entitled to a share in the compensation amount. Similarly, her sister Taherunnisa filed I.A.No.52 of 2011 and another sister Gousiaunnisa also filed I.A. No.1279 of 2011. By common order dated 01.02.2012, the lower Court has dismissed all these applications. Feeling aggrieved by the same, of the three applicants for impleadment, only Meharunnisa filed the present civil revision petition.

(3.) The lower Court has placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ambey Devi Vs. State of Bihar, 1996 9 SCC 84 and also on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in M/s. Cyrus Investment (P) Ltd., Hyderabad and another Vs. Mohd. Fareeduddin Khan and others, 1993 3 ALT 246 (D.B.) in holding that the civil Court has no jurisdiction to implead the parties who are un-connected with the reference proceedings. As regards this legal position, there is no quarrel on it, because the reference Court exercises a limited jurisdiction, as it derives its jurisdiction from the terms of reference.