9911796707
TMI Blog1969 (3) TMI 93X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... so as to include the right of audience as also to cross examine the claimants witnesses etc. in the matter. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ( 2. ) The Gujarat Housing Board is constituted under the provisions contained in Gujarat Housing Board Act 1961 and as contemplated in subsec. (3) of sec. 3 thereof it shall be deemed to be a local authority for the purposes of the Act as also for the relevant Land Acquisition Law. It is common ground that this Board is interested in the land acquisition proceedings as the compensation amount is to come from its funds for the acquisition of those lands and since it is a Local Authority as required in sec. 50(2) of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) it has a right to appear and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. We may set out sec. 50 of the Act. It runs thus :- 50 (1) Where the provisions of this Act are put in force for the purpose of acquiring land at the cost of any fund controlled or managed by a local authority or of any Company the charges of and incidental to such acquisition shall be defrayed from or by such fund or Company. (2) In any proceeding held befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esides except that it has no right to demand a reference as provided in sec. 50(2) proviso it has all the rights of a party in any such legal proceeding. It should therefore be joined as a party in all those Compensation Cases. The contention on the other hand is that such a Body much though the funds for the acquisition of the land come from it does not become the party to the proceedings in any manner as it is given a limited right to appear and adduce evidence if any for the only purpose of determining the amount of compensation. Besides it was said that if it was intended to be joined as a party to the proceeding it must have been shown to be a person interested as defined in sec. 2(3) of the Act and the very fact that it has not been so shown and on the other hand when it has been specifically denied the right to demand even reference under sec. 18 of the Act the Board is not given any such status as that of a party to the proceeding so as to have all the rights of a party or person interested in the same. In fact he is represented for all purposes by the Local Government through Collector which puts the proceedings in motion for acquisition of the property and it is only the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. This provision entitles the Court to strike out or join any person as plaintiff or defendant if it thought that the name of any such person ought to have been joined or whose presence before the Court was considered necessary in order to enable the Court effectually and completely to adjudicate upon and settle all the questions involved in the same. The same considerations would also arise and since no award can be passed against it or that it would not be entitled to file an appeal against any such award under the Act it would not be even a proper party without whose being on record Court cannot decide the matter completely. The Board has been given merely a right to adduce evidence in support of the Collector who represents the State which acquires the property for the local authority. In our view therefore even if provisions of Civil Procedure Code were to apply and the application be so made we think that the Board is neither a necessary nor a proper party to the proceeding as a party defendant in any suit. A party is and has to be one against whom there exists any relief and that the Court can grant it so that it can challenge it even in appeal like any other party in a sui ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (b) of the Act which defines the expression persons interested. That includes all persons claiming an interest in compensation to be made on account of the acquisition of the land under this Act. It becomes therefore plain that the persons interested referred to so far in the award that may be passed by the Collector would be those persons claiming interest in compensation which may be made on account of their land having been acquired by the Government. They are thus no others than the claimants in respect of the compensation amount meaning thereby the persons who are either owners or having any interest in the land acquired for which they can claim compensation or a share therein. Thus that expression does not contemplate any such Local authority for whose benefit land is acquired and from whom the compensation is to come. At that stage the Govt. becomes a party proposing the amount of compensation to be made to those persons having interest in land and that creates a liability on the Govt. So much so that the award under sec. 11 of the Act binds it. Even the Govt. has no right to demand a reference against that award of the Local authority or the Collector as the case may be. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y) of them as have consented without protest to receive payment of the compensation awarded and (c) if the objection is in regard to the area of the land or to the amount of the compensation the Collector. It is from the reference made by the Collector that the Court has to find out the persons who are parties to the proceeding before him. There is no other person contemplated in sec. 20 of the Act on whom any such notice is required to be served. As we said above the Local Authority is not a person interested as could come under sec. 3(b) of the Act and where the question involved in the reference is amount of compensation or area the Collector and that way a representative of Local Government which acquires the land is required to be a party to the proceeding. In fact we find nowhere any term such a party to the proceeding used and all that they refer to are persons interested in the compensation or where there arise questions of compensation or area of the land the Collector has to be before the Court in that proceeding. They can be styled as parties of which claimant can well be characterized as it were a plaintiff and the Collectora defendant in a suit. The Collector represent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... award either by the Collector under sec. 11 or by the Court under sec. 26 of the Act. After leaving some sections which deal with apportionment of compensation there comes sec. 31 which provides that the Collector on making an award under sec. 11 shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub-section. Sec. 34 then says that when the amount of such compensation is not paid or deposited on or before taking possession of the land the Collector shall pay the amount awarded with interest thereon at the rate of six per centum per annum from the time of so taking possession until it shall have been so paid or deposited. It may be stated here that it is the Collector who is entitled to take possession of the land after the award is made under sec. 11 and the land shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government as contemplated under sec. 16 of the Act. It is by virtue of an agreement between the Local Authority such as the Housing Board in this case and the Government that on being satisfied about the requi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch a Local Authority or the Company as the case may be contemplated under sec. 50 of the Act should be given an opportunity to meet any claim of compensation made by the persons interested in the land acquired by the Government giving it a proper intimation to appear and adduce evidence if any in relation to the question of the amount of compensation. It can help the party Government in reducing its burden in that direction and more so as the party required to pay may well take all care to see that adequate evidence is procured and placed before the Land Acquisition Officer or the Court so that an adequate and reasonable compensation may have to be paid. But in no case it would mean that by having to issue any such notice under sec. 50(2) of the Act as amended by Gujarat State it changes its character and makes it a party to the proceeding giving all the rights of a party to any legal proceeding in law. In our view it is a limited right given to it under sec. 50(2) and that too for a limited purpose and in no case it can be joined or added as a party defendant either because it is a necessary or a proper party as understood in relation to a legal proceeding. ( 10. ) Mr . Parikh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isting the Secretary of State. It appears that the effect of the words may appear and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation has not been considered. In our view it involves something more than mere watching of the proceedings or assisting the Secretary of State or the Collector as the case may be in such proceedings. Another decision referred to by him is the case of Corporation of the City of Nagpur through the Chief Executive Officer Nagpur v. Narendrakumar Motilal and others A.I.R. 1959 Bombay 297. In the proceedings before the Land Acquisition Officer the Corporation of the City of Nagpur for which the land was sought to be acquired was permitted to intervene under the provisions of sec. 50(2) for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. The Corporation was dissatisfied with the award made by the Land Acquisition Officer and had applied under sec. 18 of the Act to the Land Acquisition Officer to make a reference to the Civil Court. The application was rejected in limine upon the ground that the applicant Corporation was not a person interested in the compensation within the meaning of sec. 18 and was therefore not entitled to mo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of State of Orissa through the Land Acquisition Collector v. Amarendra Pratap Singh and another A.I.R. 1967 Orissa 120. As observed in that case secs. 3(b) 18 20 21 and 50 make it clear that a company or a local authority for whose benefit the acquisition is made is not entitled to demand a reference under sec. 18 and is not a necessary party to such proceedings though it can in any proceeding before the Collector or the Court appear and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the amount of compensation. It also follows that it has no right to file any appeal against the judgment of the Court. It would thus appear that having regard to the definition of the expression is persons interested in sec. 3(b) and taking into account the scheme of the Act as a whole much though the funds for acquisition of the land were to be paid by them they cannot be said to be persons interested as to claim any right to have a reference made or to have any appeal filed against any such award passed by the Court. They are not recognised under the Act as parties to the proceedings. ( 11. ) It was however pointed out by the learned Advocate General appearing for the Gujarat Housing Board ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be given full meaning so much so that the expression adduce evidence would be included within the meaning of the term pleading as used in the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code. As to the expression appear it was pointed out that in respect of Local Authority there was no question of any physical appearance of any such Board and that appearance was to be by some authorised person on its behalf. Now it cannot adduce evidence without appearing and therefore as provided therein such a Local Authority becomes entitled to appear through its representative and that appearance is obviously intended for the purpose of meeting the case in regard to compensation for the land acquired to be determined in the case. Thus it can appear even through an advocate or any authorised agent for the purpose of adducing evidence. This right of adducing evidence may well be treated as part of pleading as pointed out by a reference to the observation made is a decision in the case of Ashwin Shambhuprasad Patel v. The National Rayon Corporation Ltd. 57 Bom.L.R. p. 209. Those observations are:- The contention put forward by Mr. Bengeri before me is that pleading is included in the expression appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s difficult to say that for that purpose it can be called a party as understood in law and all that therefore we may say is that while it is entitled to be on record and for the purpose mentioned in sec. 50(2) it has a right to appear and adduce evidence if any as explained above. It gets no other right under sec. 50(2) of the Act. It was urged by Mr. Desai the learned Government Pleader appearing for the State that with the direction to issue notice to the acquiring body it has to be taken that it was a notice issued for appearing in the matter for all purposes as would be issued to the claimant and the Collector under sec. 20 of the Act. Besides it was said that the Legislature added or amended those words in sec. 50(2) as it related to the Local Authority or Company referred to in sec. 50 of the Act and that otherwise it would have been required to add words to that effect both in sec. 9 and sec. 20 of the Act the former touching the proceedings before the Land Acquisition Officer and the latter before the Court. Now it is true that the Courts below have taken the view that sec. 20 would have been so amended but that does not determine the question. The provisions of the Act hav ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ers had in view when they passed it into law. The Bill may have undergone radical changes during its passage through the House or Houses and there is no guarantee that the reasons which led to its introduction and the objects thereby sought to be achieved have remained the same throughout till the Bill emerges from the House as an Act of the Legislature for they do not form part of the Bill and are not voted upon by the members. The Statement of Objects and Reasons appended to the Bill should be ruled out as an aid to the construction of a statute. This proposition has not been challenged by the learned Advocate General though no doubt he invited reference to two other decisions of the Supreme Court in this regard. The first as the decision in the case of S. C. Prashar Income Tax Officer v. Vasantsen Dwarkadas and others (1964) 1 Supreme Court Reports 29. At page 54 some observations made by the Court were referred to:- But the statement of Objects and Reasons can be referred to for the purpose of ascertaining the circumstances which led to the legislation in order to find out what was the mischief which the legislation aimed at. Another decision is in the case of A. Thangal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
