Case Note & Summary
The case involves two first appeals arising from a common judgment and award dated 24.04.2006 passed by the Reference Court in L.A.C.No.390/2000. First Appeal No. 656 of 2010 was filed by the Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (VIDC), the acquiring body, challenging the award on the ground that the reference was decided in its absence. First Appeal No. 1081 of 2008 was filed by the State Government also impugning the same award. The parties agreed that the record and proceedings need not be called for. The appellant in First Appeal No. 656 of 2010 relied on Supreme Court judgments in U.P. Awas Evan Vikas Parishad v. Gyan Devi (AIR 1995 SC 724) and Abdul Rasak v. Kerala Water Authority (AIR 2002 SC 817), as well as orders in similar matters including First Appeal No. 177 of 2009 and a Division Bench judgment in First Appeal No. 93/2010 dated 04.05.2010. The Court found that the acquiring body was not impleaded as a party and the award was passed in its absence, rendering the award unsustainable. Consequently, the Court set aside the award and remanded the matter to the Reference Court for de novo consideration, directing that the appellant in First Appeal No. 656 of 2010 be permitted to be impleaded as a party. The parties were granted liberty to adduce evidence in support of their respective cases. Both appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Reference Proceedings - Non-Joinder of Acquiring Body - The acquiring body, Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, was not impleaded as a party in the reference proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the award was passed in its absence - The Court held that the award was unsustainable and set it aside, remanding the matter for de novo consideration after permitting the acquiring body to be impleaded - Held that the acquiring body is a necessary party and must be given an opportunity to adduce evidence (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment and award of the Reference Court is sustainable when the acquiring body was not impleaded as a party and the reference was decided in its absence.
Final Decision
Both first appeals are allowed. The judgment and award of the Reference Court dated 24.04.2006 in L.A.C.No.390/2000 are set aside. The matter is remanded back to the Reference Court for de novo consideration after permitting the appellant in First Appeal No. 656 of 2010 to be impleaded as a party. Parties are at liberty to adduce evidence. No costs.
Law Points
- Land acquisition
- Reference Court
- non-joinder of necessary party
- remand for de novo hearing
- right to adduce evidence
