NAWAL KISHORE UPADHYA Vs. PANPATI LOHARIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against the order/award passed by the Land Acquisition Judge -cum -Subordinate Judge -I, Doaltonganj (hereinafter referred to as L.A. Judge), whereby the learned Court below has directed to prepare award in favour of the respondent while awarding the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act.

(2.) LEARNED L.A. Judge has based his finding on a purported decision of the Supreme Court of the year 1993, without giving the exact reference or even the names of the parties. Learned L.A. Judge concluded on the basis of his vague memory that the Apex Court has held 'Lohar' as the member of Scheduled Tribe and the applicant -respondent, being by caste Lohar, comes within the meaning of Scheduled Tribes and as such, any sale deed executed by the ancestors of the applicant -respondent in favour of the appellants -opposite parties is hit by the provisions of the Chhonagpur Tenancy Act and is void ab initio. Any rent receipt pursuant to the said registered sale deed cannot legalise the void document valid and that the opposite parties -appellants are held not entitled to get compensation on the basis of the sale deed followed by rent receipts.

(3.) THE said land was acquired for the purpose of construction of main canal under Butan Duba Project. The said and was claimed by the opposite party -appellants on the basis of registered sale deed of the year 1941 -42 and followed by their continuous cultivating possession and payment of rent.