JUGUL KISHORE Vs. PRATAB DEI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is not possible for me to understand what the President means by the following words: It is true that Lala Jugul Kishore has also filed a reference contending that the amount of compensation should be paid to him. We shall decide the respective claims of Jugul Kishore and Mt. Pratab Dei in that reference.

(2.) First of all a reference can be made, so far as I understand, by the Land Acquisition Officer to the Tribunal and not by a party. Neither I nor counsel for parties have been able to discover the paper which the President calls a reference by Jugul Kishore. Further if the President is seised of the matter in dispute between Jugul Kishore and Mt. Pratab Dei and a reference has been made to him, I. do not understand what stage of proceedings he considers that reference to be. What would be the use of the Tribunal deciding as to whom the money belongs when the money itself has disappeared? It is requested that the President will enlighten me on the following points: (1) Has any reference been made to the Tribunal by the Land Acquisition Officer to decide the dispute between Jugul Kishore and Mt. Pratab Dei as regards the amount of compensation? (2) If not, what is the "reference" to which allusion is made in the portion of the President's Judgment quoted above? (3) If the Land Acquisition Officer has not made a reference, under that rule can a party directly approach the Tribunal? (4) If reference has been made by the Land Acquisition Officer, why does the President think that is a separate matter and not connected with the money taken away by Mt. Pratab Dei?

(3.) While making the return it is requested that the President will send the necessary papers to this Court. (After the receipt of the President's reply on the above points the Court delivered the following.) <JGN>Dalal</JGN> , J.