COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION Vs. DHANI RAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THROUGH the medium of this Civil Miscellaneous petition, appellants have sought indulgence of the court for leave to amend the memorandum of Civil Appeal No. 53/94 by impleading the legal representatives of deceased Soba Ram and Daya Ram, the respondents No. 2 and 3. It is inter -alia maintained in the petition that during the course of effecting service of notice in the said appeal, the petitioner -appellant No. 2 on enquiry learnt that respondent No. 2 had died on 25.11.1991 and respondent No. 3 had died on 17.5.1987 respectively that is to say during the proceedings pending before the District Judge, Udhampur and no steps have been taken either by the legal representatives of the said respondents to be brought on record not the Advocate appearing on behalf of these deceased -respondents had intimated the court about their death and under these circumstances the death of aforesaid respondents could not be known either to the reference court or to the appellants. That the appellants learnt about the death of said respondents No. 2 and 3 only in the first week or February 1995 and present application in hand has been filled without any loss of time.

(2.) THE respondents through their counsel have resisted the petition by filling their written objections stating therein inter -alia that the appellantsapplicants on their own showing admit that at the time of filing of appeal, the respondents Soba Ram and Daya Ram were dead, as such appeal is incompetent. That the appeal having been directed against the judgement and decree dated 15.7.1994 recorded by the District Judge, Udhampur was barred by the time at the time of the presentation of the application which appears to have been filed in the month of March 1995 as against the persons sought to be arrayed as parties. That the cause being joint and indivisible, the appeal therefore, abates; that the reference proceedings under the settled law could be taken to its logical conclusion despite the presence or otherwise of any party.

(3.) IT appears that land measuring 264 kanals 9 marlas and land measuring about 84 kanals and 5 marlas both located at village Salal Surman Tehsil Reasi came to be acquired under the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as Act) by virtue of Award No. SLA/67 -70 dated 26.6.1983 and Award No. SLA -332 -36 dated 20.1.1994 and total compensation of Rs 5,63,941.49 and an amount of Rs. 12247.47 respectively came to be awarded as compensation to the land owners, but the respondents land owners were not satisfied with the award as a result of which they approached the Collector -appellant Under Section 18 of the Act for making reference to the District court, who in turn made the reference to the learned District Judge, Udhampur. The learned District Judge, Udhampur after inviting objections of the parties and after framing the issues and the recording the evidence of the petitioners and their witnesses, when appellants did not lead any evidence in rebuttal and after discussion of the evidence came to pass impugned award by virtue of judgement dated 15.7.1994, wherein, he came to award compensation of Rs @ Rs. 6000/ - per Kanal for irrigated land, Rs. 5000/ - per kanal for khushki land inclusive of Waryal Awal, Rs 2000/ - per kanal for Banjar Qadim and Rs 1000/ - per kandal for Gair Mumkin and came to hold the petitioners entitled to compensation on the said enhanced rate including the costs of fruit bearing and non -fruit bearing trees etc. which shall be assessed by PWD in accordance with the revised rates of 1982; Costs of fruit bearing trees shall be assessed by the Horticulture Department and all other trees by the Forest Department respectively with a further direction that enhanced compensation shall be paid from the date of taking over possession of said land and the solatium on the enhanced compensation to be paid within three months from the date of said order failing which it shall carry 12% interest till the amount is deposited. It further appears that during the proceedings pending before the learned Reference court, the claimants namely, Soba Ram and Daya Ram respondents No. 2 and 3 in this appeal expired during the proceedings before the learned Reference court.