JUDGMENT - COUTO G.F., J.: - Can the District Court in a reference under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, implead persons who claim to be entitled to the compensation awarded in a land acquisition proceedings or to a part thereof, or who claim to be interested in the acquired property, when the same persons were not parties before the Collector, is the question that arises in this revision application. The petitioner's answer to this question is in the affirmative, while the respondents are of the opposite view.

2. The facts are not in dispute and strictly speaking, it is not necessary for me to advert to them in detail. It suffices to say that proceedings had been initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for the acquisition of a plot of land situated at Curchorem, for the construction of Police Staff Quarters. It appears that initially, only the respondents Dr. Kusha Kudchadkar and Prabhakar Kudchadkar were shown as the persons interested in the land proposed to be required. However, before the passing of the award, the respondents Nos. 1 to 5 (Lotlikars) filed an application before the Collector alleging to be interested parties, since the acquired land belonged to them. The Collector passed his award, but since he felt that he was unable to determine who was entitled to the compensation, he referred the dispute raised by the aforesaid respondents Lotlikar, to the District Court under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. The said reference is still pending disposal in the District Court, South Goa, and at one stage of the said proceedings, the petitioner herein filed an application dated 7th March, 1985 praying that he be impleaded as a party in the said reference, since, according to him, the acquired land is a joint property in which he also has a right, share and interest. The learned Judge however, by his order dated 14th August, 1985, dismissed the application on the ground that no new parties can be added in a reference made by the Land Acquisition Officer under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act. He held the view that such reference is to be disposed of only amongst the parties who are impleaded in the same reference, which is to be otherwise adjudicated in its precise terms. He added that apart from this, if the applicant/petitioner herein so desires, it was open to him to approach the Land Acquisition Officer to re-frame the terms of the reference, or to file a suit in a Court of competent jurisdiction to get redress to his grievances. It is against this order that the present revision application is directed.

3. Mr. S.K. Kakodkar, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended that the District Judge, South Goa, was wrong in dismissing the application on the ground that no new parties can be added in a reference made under section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act by the Collector or Land Acquisition Officer. He invited my attention to section 53 of the Act which provides that save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in the Act, the provisions of the Civil Procedure Code will apply to the proceedings before the Court under the same Act. He urged that there is noting in the Land Acquisition Act, and in its scheme, which is inconsistent with the impleading of interested parties in a reference and much to the contrary, this impleading is fully consistent with the Act. In fact, “person interested” is defined in section 3(b) as including all persons claiming an interest in the compensation to be made on account of acquisition of land under the Act and that a person shall be deemed to be interested in land if he is interested in an easement affecting the land. This definition is wide enough to include in it persons who claim any kind of interest in the land. Therefore, a person who claims to have a share in the said property is, naturally, to be held as an interested party. The petitioner has approached the Court precisely with a case that he is one of the co-o

Click Here to Read the rest of this document