Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, owners of land Gat No. 701 admeasuring 49 R at village Khandali, had their land acquired by the respondent authorities for construction of a storage tank. The Land Acquisition Officer published notice under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 22.3.1999 and passed an award granting inadequate compensation. Aggrieved, the petitioners filed Land Acquisition Reference No. 469 of 2005 before the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedpur. On the date of hearing, the petitioners' advocate did not attend nor informed the petitioners. The advocate remained absent on every hearing date. On 29.1.2010, the Reference Court closed the petitioners' evidence and dismissed the reference for want of evidence, holding that the petitioners failed to lead evidence. The petitioners were informed of the order on 15.6.2010. They filed this Civil Revision Application under Section 115 CPC challenging the order. The petitioners' counsel argued that the order was passed without giving opportunity of hearing, violating principles of natural justice, and that the reference should have been decided on merits. Reliance was placed on Kawadu Madhav Bansod Vs. State of Maharashtra & another, 2004(4) Bom.C.R. 495. The High Court held that the Reference Court ought to have given an opportunity to the petitioners to lead evidence and should not have dismissed the reference on technicalities. The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Reference Court for fresh hearing on merits, directing the parties to appear on 13.12.2010.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Reference - Dismissal for Default - Principles of Natural Justice - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 18 - The Reference Court dismissed the reference for want of evidence as the petitioners' advocate remained absent on hearing dates. The High Court held that the dismissal without giving opportunity of hearing violates principles of natural justice and set aside the order, remanding the matter for fresh hearing on merits. (Paras 3-7) B) Civil Procedure - Revision - Interference with Interlocutory Orders - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 115 - The High Court in revision can interfere where the lower court has acted in violation of principles of natural justice or has caused failure of justice. The impugned order dismissing the reference without hearing the petitioners was set aside. (Paras 6-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Reference Court was justified in dismissing the Land Acquisition Reference for want of evidence without giving the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, and whether such dismissal violates principles of natural justice.
Final Decision
The Civil Revision Application is allowed. The impugned order dated 29.1.2010 passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmedpur in L.A.R. No. 469 of 2005 is set aside. The matter is remanded to the Reference Court for fresh hearing on merits. The parties are directed to appear before the Reference Court on 13.12.2010. Rule made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Principles of natural justice
- Opportunity of hearing
- Land acquisition reference
- Dismissal for default
- Remand for fresh hearing
