Sirugudi Narayana Rao & Ors. v. Reddipalli Laxmana Rao & Ors.

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR L.A.A.S.NO.809 OF 2007 JUDGMENT: (Per SK,J) The legal representatives of claimant No.3 in O.P.No.8 of 2004 on the file of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, are the appellants in this appeal. The said O.P. arose out of a reference made by the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Revenue Division, Visakhapatnam, under Sections 30 and 31(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, owing to the rival claims over the compensation payable for the land admeasuring Ac.0.01½ cents situated in Survey No.61/2B6 of Maddilapalem Village in Visakhapatnam, which was acquired by the State for the purpose of road widening. By Award No.7/93 dated 30.07.1993, the Land Acquisition Officer, upon due enquiry, determined the compensation payable at Rs.36,091/-. As there was a dispute as to the apportionment of the said compensation amongst the claimants, the reference was made to the Court as aforestated. Respondent No.1 herein, being claimant No.1 in the O.P., filed his claim statement admitting that claimant Nos.2 to 4 were his maternal uncles and laying a claim to 1/5th share in the compensation. As the notice issued to claimant No.3 in the said O.P. was returned with the endorsement that he had died, the matter was adjourned for enabling steps to be taken to implead his legal representatives. However, no steps were taken thereafter. As claimant Nos.2 and 4 also failed to file their claim statements in spite of service of notice and claimant No.1 did not evince interest; the claim petition was closed by the Court on 11.04.2005. Thereafter, claimant No.1 filed I.A.No.50 of 2005 in the O.P. seeking reopening of the matter by setting aside the order dated

11.04.2005. Notice thereon was served only upon the Land Acquisition Officer. The reference Court however failed to take note of the above stated aspects and straight away adjudicated the matter on merits by order dated 08.07.2005, deciding the entitlement of the heirs of the deceased claimant No.3 in their absence. Aggrieved thereby, the legal representatives of claimant No.3 are before this Court. The order under appeal reflects that the Court below was aware of the fact that claimant No.3 had died and that no steps were taken to implead his legal representatives. In spite of the same, the Court went on to adjudicate the matter without initiating steps for putting the legal representatives of the deceased claimant No.3 on notice. As the adjudication inevitably had effect on their interests as their share in the compensation awarded stood decided in their absence, the appellants herein being the legal representatives of claimant No.3 have a justified grievance. The Court below ought to have been aware of the consequences of its action in deciding the matter behind their back and ought to have taken care to see that all the affected parties were put on notice prior to the adjudication of the matter on merits. We accordingly set aside the order dated 08.07.2005 passed by the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, in O.P.No.8 of 2004 and remit the matter for consideration afresh after impleadment of all the necessary parties. As the matter has been kept pending for a sufficiently long period, the interest of justice requires that it be given expeditious disposal. The Court below is accordingly directed to take up the matter on priority basis and dispose of the same on merits, after giving due opportunity in all respects to the parties concerned, within four (4) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The appeal is accordingly allowed. In the circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. _______________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J. ____________________ SANJAY KUMAR, J. _________ DECEMBER, 2010. VGSR