DINESH KUMAR Vs. BACHNA RAM AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against the order passed by the learned reference Court whereby he rejected the application of the petitioner seeking his impleadment in the reference proceedings.

(2.) No fault can be found with the order passed by the reference Court as the same has been passed strictly in consonance with law and in tune with the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Ramji Gupta and Anr. versus Gopi Krishan Agrawal(D) and Ors., 2013(2) Civil Court Cases 668=2013 (9) SCC 438 wherein it has been unequivocally held that the reference Court does not have the power to entertain an application under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC. It was further held that a person who has not made an application before the Land Acquisition Collector, for making a reference under Sec. 18 or 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, cannot get himself impleaded directly before the reference Court. This is evidently clear from the following observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court contained in paragraphs 28 to 32 which read thus:-

(3.) Consequently, there is no merit in this revision petition and the same is dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. However, such dismissal shall have no bearing on merits of the civil suit that has been instituted by the petitioner and the appeal whereof pending adjudication before the learned Additional District Judge, Nalagarh.