NARAYAN DAS Vs. KASINATH PANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE disputed land measuring 1. 01 acre was acquired. The petitioner claimed the entire disputed land as belonging to him. The Land Acquisition Officer negatived his claim and held that the opp. parties were entitled to compensation. The award was prepared and signed on 12-12-64. On 15-12-64 the petitioner filed an application praying that the matter may be referred by the Collector to the District judge for determination of the person to whom the compensation is payable. The land Acquisition Officer in his order dated 29-12-64 held that the petitioner failed to establish that he had any interest in the acquired property. The revision is filed against this order refusing to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ).

(2.) MR. Ranjit Mohanty contended that the petitioner is a "person interested" within the meaning of the expression in Section 3 (b) of the Act and that the Land acquisition Officer acted in excess of his jurisdiction in recording a finding that the petitioner had no interest in the land and in rejecting his application for reference on that finding without leaving the matter to be determined by the competent court under Section 18 of the Act. Mr. K. C. Mohanty, on the other hand, contended that the petitioner's name did not occur in the award and, as such, he could claim a reference only under Section 30 and not under Section 18 of the Act and that against an order refusing to make a reference under Section 20, no civil revision lies. Mr. J. K. Mohanty contended that in Title Suit No. 392 of 1942, decided on 25-10-43, the title of Satyabadi Das as against Bharat Chandra Pani, ramchandra Pani and Luxman Pani, the predecessors-in-interest of Kasinath Pani (Opp. Party-1), was negatived; as the petitioner derived title from Satyabadi Das, he is bound by the previous decree and his present claim is frivolous. As such, he is not a person interested to ask for a reference under Section 18. All these contentions require careful examination.

(3.) SECTION 3 (b) of the Act defines "a person interested" thus -