Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Wallis and Sankaran Nair, JJ.
Pudiya Kovilakath Kuttuni Thamburan and Ors.
Versus
Kuth Valia Thamburatti and Anr.
Decided On : 18.08.1909
Land Acquisition Act - Compensation Apportionment - Kanomdar's Interest
Fact of the Case:
The Subordinate Judge did not correctly dispose of the reference under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. The compensation had to be apportioned among the interested persons, including the kanomdar who had a dual interest as lessee and mortgagee.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the kanomdar was entitled to compensation for both the partial deprivation of possession as a lessee and the jenmies interest as a mortgagee. The amount payable to the kanomdar as a lessee should be deducted from the total compensation, and the balance should be applied to satisfy the kanom amount as it represents part of the security mortgaged to the kanomdar.
Issues: The issues revolved around the correct apportionment of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act, considering the dual interest of the kanomdar as a lessee and mortgagee.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted that the kanomdar's interest as a lessee and mortgagee should be considered separately in the apportionment of compensation. The amount payable to the kanomdar as a lessee should be deducted from the total compensation, and the balance should be applied to satisfy the kanom amount as it represents part of the security mortgaged to the kanomdar.
Final Decision: The case was remanded for disposal according to law, with costs to abide.
1. The Subordinate Judge has not disposed of the reference correctly under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act. The compensation has to be apportioned among the persons known or believed to be interested in the land. As the kanom partakes of the character of a lease and a mortgage, the kanomdar has the two-fold interest of lessee and mortgagee and is entitled to compensation in respect of both interests. Where as here a part of the demised premises are acquired under the Act the most convenient course appears to be in the first place to assess the amount of compensation, if any, payable to the kanomdar in his capacity of lessee in respect of partial deprivation of possession he has sustained. In so doing allowance must be made for the fact that he is entitled to a proportionate reduction of rent in respect of this partial deprivation. Deducting the amount payable to the kanomdar as lessee, the balance represents the jenmies interest as lessor. This is mortgaged under the kanom to the kanomdar, who is, therefore, entitled to have the balance applied in the first place in satisfaction of the kanom amount as it represents the part of the security mortgaged to him. The case must go back for disposal according to law Costs to abide.
AI
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
