Case Note & Summary
The present appeal arises from a judgment and order passed by the learned Ad hoc District Judge-1, Dhule, in Civil M.A. No. 16/2015, which was a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellant, Smt. Kalabai Tulshiram Bagale, was the original respondent no. 2 in that reference. The respondent no. 1, the Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition No. 1, District Collector Office, Dhule, had made the reference for apportionment of compensation between the original applicant (respondent no. 2 herein, Onkar Muka Bagale) and the appellant. The appellant contended that she was the owner of the acquired land and was entitled to the compensation, but she was not served with any notice under Section 20 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, before the reference was decided. The learned Ad hoc District Judge, by the impugned judgment and order dated 27th June 2019, allowed the reference and directed that the compensation amount be paid to the original applicant (respondent no. 2) and not to the appellant. Aggrieved, the appellant filed the present first appeal. The High Court examined the record and found that indeed no notice under Section 20 of the Act was issued to the appellant. The court held that the reference under Section 30 is for apportionment of compensation, and Section 20 mandates that the court shall cause notice to be served on all persons interested in the compensation. Since the appellant was a necessary party and was not given notice, the entire reference proceedings were void ab initio. The court set aside the impugned judgment and order and remanded the matter back to the learned Ad hoc District Judge for fresh consideration after issuing notice to all parties. The appeal was allowed.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Reference under Section 30 - Apportionment of Compensation - Notice under Section 20 - The reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for apportionment of compensation requires issuance of notice under Section 20 to all persons interested in the compensation. Failure to issue such notice to a necessary party renders the proceedings void ab initio. (Paras 1-10) B) Land Acquisition - Reference under Section 18 - Enhancement of Compensation - The reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for enhancement of compensation is distinct from a reference under Section 30 for apportionment. The court must ensure that all interested parties are served notice before adjudicating apportionment. (Paras 1-10) C) Civil Procedure - Natural Justice - Notice to Necessary Party - Any judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding that affects the rights of a person without giving them an opportunity of being heard is violative of principles of natural justice and is liable to be set aside. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the subsequent award apportioning compensation, is valid when no notice under Section 20 of the Act was issued to the appellant, who was a necessary party and interested person.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 27th June 2019 passed by the learned Ad hoc District Judge-1, Dhule, in Civil M.A. No. 16/2015 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the learned Ad hoc District Judge-1, Dhule, for fresh consideration after issuing notice to all parties, including the appellant, in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge-1, Dhule, on 29th July 2019.
Law Points
- Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- Section 30
- Section 20
- Section 18
- Notice to interested parties
- Apportionment of compensation
- Reference proceedings
- Void ab initio
- Natural justice
