DEEPCHAND Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER COLLECTOR RAJGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against an order dated 29th April 1969 passed by the Additional District Judge Rajgarh in Civil Miscellaneous Judicial Case No. 3 of 1965.

(2.) THE facts giving rise to this appeal briefly are as follows: the Land Acquisition Officer Rajgarh made a reference under the second proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 49 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) for determination of the question as to whether the land in question, which was being acquired by the Land Acquisition Officer for the Municipal Committee Biora, formed an integral part of the appellants' factory and Office buildings. The learned Additional District Judge Rajgarh by his order dated 29th April 1969 held that the land proposed to be acquired did not form an integral part of the appellants' factory and office buildings. Aggrieved by this decision the appellants have preferred this appeal.

(3.) WHEN this appeal came up for hearing a preliminary objection was raised on behalf of the respondents that the appeal preferred by the appellants was not competent. In reply Shri Chaphekar learned counsel for the appellants urged that the impugned order passed by the learned Additional District Judge has the force of a decree and as such it is appealable according to law. The point was therefore fully argued, and having heard learned counsel for the parties, we have come to the conclusion that the preliminary objection to the maintainability of the appeal must be upheld. 3a. Now the decision under appeal has been given on a reference made to the Court under Section 49 (1) of the Act. That decision is obviously not an 'award', and learned counsel for the appellants did not also urge that it was an 'award'. As it is not an award there is no right of appeal against that decision under Section 54 of the Act, which reads as under-