HANUMAN MAHABIR JEW Vs. PURUSOTTAM KAR AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an appeal under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act against an award made in a reference under section 30 of the Act.

(2.) Land measuring 63 decimals in revenue village Kasimabad was acquired for establishment of interim test range. Land Acquisition Officer made an award under section 11 of the Act in favour of the appellant-deity through its managing trustee. Although there was no dispute regarding the amount of compensation awarded, respondent No. 1 claiming to be owner of the land made an application that he is entitled to the compensation amount. In view of such application, Land Acquisition Officer made a reference to court for determination of the interest of the person entitled to compensation awarded.

(3.) In a reference to court under the Act, person whose interest is negatived or reduced and at whose instance the reference is made, stands in the position of a plaintiff in a suit and onus lies on him to prove his interest. In this case, however, trial court treated the appellant-deity in whose favour award was made to be in position of plaintiff. Though the same does not affect the proceeding as to be parties adduced evidence, I may observe that the person who claims interest to exclusion of person in whose favour has been made under section 11 of the Act should be called upon to prove his case first as at his instance the award is to be interfered with. Where Collector makes the reference without determining the person who is entitled to compensation, court is to hear the parties and call upon the person who has prima facie a lesser interest or no interest to adduce evidence in support of his case.