CHARAN DASS Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law :-

(2.) WHETHER the plaint could be rejected under the provisions of Order 7, Rule 11, cpc even if the Court had no jurisdiction or the plaint was required to be returned for presentation before the Court having the jurisdiction ? 2. The brief facts, necessary for the decision of the case, are that the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff) filed a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the State of Himachal Pradesh and the Land Acquisition Collector, HPPWD, (respondent Nos. 1 and 2) from making or releasing the compensation amount, solatium, etc. to the defendant Shri Jagat Ram in respect of 8 biswas of land being part of the acquired land. The plaintiff claimed that he alone is entitled to the compensation in respect of this land. According to the plaintiff, proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) were initiated for acquiring a large amount of land, including land comprising Khasra No. 306/1 measuring 0-3 bighas, 730/1 measuring 0. 5 bighas, 731/1 measuring 1-4 bighas and 1745/729/1 measuring 0. 6 bighas comprised in Khewat Nos. 55 and 56, khatuni Nos. 79 and 81, by the State vide notification dated 11-10-1994. According to him, in the initial notification the shares of the parties were correctly depicted. However, by subsequent notification dated 14-7-1997 the respondents 1 and 2 illegally and arbitrarily reduced the area of the plaintiff by 8 biswas and added that to the area of defendant no. 3. On this basis, it was alleged that the defendant No. 3 is not entitled to the compensation in respect of 8 biswas of land awarded in his favour and that the plaintiff is entitled to compensation in respect of 8 biswas of land. In the present case, the award was announced by the Collector on 19-8-1997. The petitioner was admittedly appearing before the Collector and filed the suit on 22-8-1997.

(3.) THIS suit was contested by the defendants on various grounds. On the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed :-