Back
2015 Supreme(HP) 590
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.
NTPC Limited - Appellant
Versus
Jitender and others – Respondents
CMP(M) No. 274 of 2015 in RFA No. 80 of 2014
Decided on: 17.06.2015
Advocate Appeared:
For the appellant :Mr. Neeraj Gupta, Advocate
For the respondents:Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Advocate vice counsel for respondents No. 1 to 3, 5, 6 and proposed LRs 4(a) to 4(c)
Mr. D.S. Nainta, Addl. A.G with Mr. Pushpinder Jaswal, Dy. A.G for respondents No. 7 and 8
The legal point established is that the death of a claimant and non-substitution of legal representatives in a reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act may impact the proceedings, but the award is not necessarily deemed a nullity, and the legal representatives can be brought on record during the pendency of the appeal.
Headnote:
Death of Claimant - Impact on Reference Petition - Land Acquisition Act, Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure
Fact of the Case:
The court addressed the impact of the death of a claimant, Shri Des Raj, during the pendency of a reference petition in a trial Court related to land acquisition. The court considered the implications of non-substitution of the deceased's legal representatives in the proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the death of the claimant and non-substitution of legal representatives could impact the proceedings, depending on the specific circumstances and the number of claimants involved.
Issues: The key issue was the impact of the death of a claimant and the non-substitution of legal representatives on the reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that in cases where the claimant dies during the proceedings, the award cannot be deemed a nullity, and the legal representatives can execute the award if none of the parties is aggrieved. The court also clarified the implications of the death of a sole claimant versus multiple claimants in a reference petition.
Final Decision: The court allowed the application, set aside the abatement of the proceedings, and ordered the substitution of the proposed legal representatives as respondents in the main appeal, along with necessary corrections in the records.
Dharam Chand Chaudhary, J.
Respondent No. 4, Shri Des Raj (one of the petitioner in the trial Court) in the main appeal has expired on 04.12.2008 i.e. during the pendency of the reference petition in the trial Court. The factum of his death was neither brought to the notice of the trial Court either by the surviving petitioners or legal representatives of the said respondent nor any steps for his substitution taken. To the contrary, the reference petition filed by said Sh. Des Raj and his brothers S/Sh. Jitender, Prakash Chand, Diwakar, Gian Chand and Tipender came to be decided along with batch of petitions vide award dated 13.12.2013, under challenge in the present appeal, without taking notice of his death and substitution of his legal representatives.
2. The question for adjudication as arisen in this application is as to what is the impact of death of deceased respondent Des Raj and non-substitution of his legal representatives in these proceedings. The law in this regard is no more res-integra as this Court in Collector Land Acquisition NHPC versus Khewa Ram and others, Latest HLJ 2007 (HP) 270, after taking into consideration the provisions contained under the Land Acquisition Act and also under Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, has held that a reference petition under Section 18 has to be answered by the Court and in case the claimant does not appear despite notice, he do so at his own risk. In the event of the sole claimant died during the course of proceedings and the Court unaware of his death answered the reference on the basis of the material available on record, in an appeal either filed by his legal representatives or the acquiring authority, the award has to be set aside and the proceedings deemed to have been abated, of course subject to the consideration of the question of setting aside the abatement on condonation of delay, however, only by the reference Court and not by the appellate Court. In a case where there are more claimants or where more than one petition (a batch of petitions) decided by a common award, death of one of the claimants or sole claimant during the course of proceedings in the trial Court do not render the award passed on common evidence led by all the parties a nullity and the legal representatives can even be brought on record during the pendency of the appeal also. The relevant portion of the judgment supra reads as follows:
“13. The question that next arises is as to what happens if the claimant has died during the proceedings. This can also happen under various circumstances, some of which are being dealt with hereunder:
a. In case there is only one claimant in an isolated case of land acquisition and the claimant dies, then obviously if the court is unaware about the death of the claimant, it will proceed to decide the reference on the material placed on record before it. In such a case, if either the legal representatives of the claimant or the acquiring authority files an appeal, then the award of the District Judge will have to be set aside and the reference proceedings deemed to have been abated. The questions whether abatement should be set aside and whether the delay, if any, should be condoned are questions to be decided by the District Judge alone and not by the appellate court.
b. However even in the aforesaid situation, the award cannot be said to be nullity since the reference court is bound by law to answer the reference. In case none of the parties is aggrieved, the legal representatives can execute the award in accordance with law.
c. In cases where there are more than one claimants and each is owner of a separate share, then the death of one of the claimants can never render the award to be a nullity. The award is answered in favour of all the claimants. Therefore, in an appeal filed either by the claimants or by the acquiring authority, the legal representatives of the deceased claimant can be brought on record even during the course of the appeal and it
