The main legal point established in the judgment is that a beneficiary under the Land Acquisition Act, as per S.50(2), is entitled to be impleaded as an intervenor in the proceedings and has the right to participate with all the rights of a full-fledged party.

Ramakrishnan, J.

The two revision petitions are coming up before us on a reference by a learned Single Judge. The question arising for decision can be formulated thus: In a case where the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 (hereinafter referred to as' the act) are invoked for acquiring land at the cost of any fund controlled or managed by a local authority or of any company. whether such local authority or company is entitled to be impleaded as a party to the proceedings pending before a court on a reference under S.18 of the Act by virtue of S.50(2) of the Act or under S.151 of the Code of Civil Procedure?

2. Facts necessary for considering the question of law arising in the revisions can be stated thus: State of Kerala. the second respondent in both the revisions acquired certain properties belonging to the revision petitioners at the request of the Greater Cochin Development Authority (GCDA). the first respondent in the two revisions. for the purpose of its Town Planning Scheme. Admittedly GCDA is a local authority as defined under the Act. Dissatisfied with the amount of compensation awarded. petitioners sought for a reference under S.18 of the Act. Accordingly. two separate references were made to the Court which were numbered as L. ARs. 274 and 275 of 1990 before the Additional Sub Judge. Cochin. In the above two reference cases. GCDA filed two interlocutory applications I.A.NOS.1021 and 1507 of 1990 under S.50(2) of the Act and under S.151 of the C.P.C with a prayer to implead it as an additional respondent in the two references. Revision petitioners alone opposed the prayer. After considering the objections raised by the petitioners. the learned Sub Judge overruled the objections and allowed the LAs. by a common order which is under challenge in these revisions.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners. Shri. T.V. Ananthan. submitted that in the scheme of the Act. the io ca) authority or company at whose instance the acquisition proceedings are initiated by the Government under the Act (for short 'the beneficiary') has no locus standi to get impleaded in the proceedings either before the Collector or before the court. Such beneficiary is not a 'person interested' as defined under the Act. The dispute regarding the quantum of compensation which is the subject matter of the references under Ss.18 and 30 of the Act (corresponding to Ss.20 and 32 of the repealed Kerala Land Acquisition Act -See Moosav. Special Tahsildar(1990 (2) KLT 887) are disputes between the owner of the land and the State or among the persons interested in receiving the compensation. No notice is contemplated to be given to the beneficiary of the acquisition in any of the proceedings under the Act. They are "wayfarers' or 'man in the street' as they were described in Mani v. Premier Tyres Ltd. (1963 KLT 628) as far as the enquiry before the Collector and the court is concerned. The right of such beneficiary under the Act is strictly confined to the right conferred on them under S.50(2) of the Act and no more. Neither the provisions under S.151. CPC nor Order 1 Rule 10(2). CPC can be invoked by it for getting itself impleaded in the proceedings as an additional party. It has been consistently held by all the High Courts including this Court that the beneficiary cannot file an appeal as of right and can file an appeal only after obtaining sanction for filing the same from the appellate court. The only right conferred on the beneficiary is to appear and adduce evidence for the purpose of determining the compensation and as such it cannot be impleaded as an eo nomine party to the proceedings or to submit pleadings or cross-examine the witnesses or advance arguments in the proceedings as if it is a full fledged party to the proceedings. The principle underlying the provisions of the Act is that the Government is acquiring land on behalf and for the benefit of the beneficiary and State is expected to take care of the interest of the ben