GOHADA Vs. SHRI DUTT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS second appeal preferred under Section 104 of the Himachal Pradesh abolition of Big Landed Estates and Land Reforms Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act), has been directed against the decision of the District Judge, mahasu, in a petition under Sec. 11 of the Act for the acquisition on payment of compensation, the right, title and interest of the land-owner by the petitioner who is a tenant in land measuring 1-16-5 bighas, comprising in Khasra Nos. 1042 and 1043 situate in village Behna, Tehsil Sadar, Mandi, whereby, confirming the decision of the compensation Officer the District Judge has dismissed the petition.

(2.) GOHADA appeared in Court and filed the petition under Section 11 of the Act, alleging, that Shri Dutt or Ram Dutt is his land-owner of the disputed land and that he was willing to pay compensation for acquisition of the landowner's right, title and interest. The respondent Shri Dutt contested, inter alia, that he was suffering from physical disability and is incapable of earning his livelihood and therefore he was entitled to the advantage of Clause (2) of Section 11 of the Act and tenant could not acquire his right, title and interest in the land.

(3.) THE learned Compensation Officer found that the respondent had failing eye sight and considering his income, it was difficult for him to earn his livelihood. It was further held that the respondent was incapable of earning his livelihood because of this physical disability. Accordingly he dismissed the petition. Gohada went in first appeal before the learned District Judge, but could not succeed and his petition was again dismissed. Against that decision, he has preferred this second appeal.