M.P. ELECTRICITY BOARD, RAJGARH Vs. RUKMINIBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board has filed this revision petition under Section 115 CPC, being aggrieved by the Order dated 30 -9 -89 passed by the Additional Judge to the Court of District Judge, Rajgarh in N.J.C. No. 8 of 1987, rejecting the application of the applicant under Order 1, R 10 CPC.

(2.) THE brief facts leading to this revision are that certain lands were acquired by the State of M.P. for the benefit of the present applicant M.P. Electricity Board for construction of 132 -K.V substation An award was passed by the Land Acquisition Officer allowing compensation for the land acquired at Rs. 37,776/ -. The non -applicants Nos. 1 and 2 filed an application before the Collector Land Acquisition for making a reference for enhancement of the award claiming a sum of Rs. 23,00,000/ - as compensation. Thereupon the reference was made by the Collector Land Acquisition to the Court of District Judge, Rajgarh. Thereafter on 27 -2 -1989 an application under Order 1, R. 10 Code of Civil Procedure was filed by the present applicant submitting therein that the lands have been acquired for the benefit of the applicant and if the claim amount is enhanced the burden would be on the present applicant, and therefore, the applicant being a necessary party being a beneficiary under the proceedings, they should be impleaded as party and allowed to put forward its case before the lower Court The learned lower Court by the impugned order disallowed the application Hence this revision petition. The learned Counsel for the applicant Shri R S Garg has strenuously argued that the learned lower Court has not considered the Supreme Court decision reported in Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P.) Ltd., v. Francis Victor Coutinho : AIR 1980 SC 1118 wherein the Supreme Court has clearly held that the person interested would include all persons who may be directly or indirectly interested in the title of the land or in the question of the compensation. As such a Body, Local Authority or Company for whose benefit the land is acquired are the persons interested within the meaning of S. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. He has also cited another authority of the Supreme Court reported in : AIR 1980 SC 1322, Sic).

(3.) ON the other hand Shri Chowdhary learned Counsel for the non -applicants Nos. 1 and 2 places reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in Santosh Kumar and Ors. v. Central Warehousing Corporation and Anr. : AIR 1986 SC 1164 wherein the Court has held that a company for whose benefit the land is being acquired cannot challenge the amount of compensation by filing a writ petition in view of the bar contained in S. 50 (2) of the Land Acquisition Act. After considering the respective arguments of the learned Counsel and perusing the order impugned I find that the learned lower Court has not considered the aforesaid two authorities, but has taken into consideration the commentary on a Book by Shri V.R. Ramchandra, wherein reliance has been placed on the judgment in : AIR 1936 Cal 688, for holding that S. 21 of the Land Acquisition Act restricts the enquiring by the Court to a consideration of the interest of the persons affected by the objection in the reference and any subject matter foreign to the matter before the Collector cannot be raised by any party or third person and he also cannot be added as a party under Order 1, R. 10 CPC. Whereas in the case of Himalaya Tiles and Marble (P) Ltd v. Erancis Victor Couninho : AIR 1980 SC 1118. The Supreme Court has held as under: The definition of a 'person interested' given in Section 18 is an inclusive definition and must be liberally construed so as to embrace all persons who may be directly or indirectly interested either in the title to the land or in the quantum of compensation. Thus the definition of 'person interested' in Section 18 must be construed so as to include a body local authority or a company for whose benefit the land is acquired and who is bound under an agreement to pay the compensation. This view accords with the principles of equity, justice and good conscience.