Skip to content


The Deputy Collector, Calicut Division Vs. Aiyavu Pillay and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai
Decided On
Judge
Reported in9Ind.Cas.341
AppellantThe Deputy Collector, Calicut Division
RespondentAiyavu Pillay and ors.
Excerpt:
land acquisition act (i of 1894), sections 9, 11, 18 and 30 - title set up to land already owned by government--adjudication--secretary of state, whether should be made a party--award of compensation--reference. - - if the claimant objects to the compensation awarded, it is for him to ask for a reference under section 18, which appears to be the only section applicable, as section 30, having regard to the language used therein, does not appear to me to apply to a case like this where the question when rightly understood is whether the amount;.....and such persons deny the title of government and set up that they themselves are the owners and claim compensation on that basis, it becomes necessary, for the purpose of fixing the compensation to be paid to them, for the collector to determine what is the interest in the land to which they are entitled, and whether they are owners as they claim to be or only entitled to the limited interest admitted by government. for this purpose, it is not necessary that the secretary of state should be made a party and added as a claimant as stated by the subordinate judge. the word claimant as used in the act means a claimant to compensation, see sections 9 and 11 and government in proceedings under the act does not claim compensation. under section 11, the collector has to enquire into the.....
Judgment:

Wallis, J.

1. In this case the 4th respondent put in a claim at a late stage of the proceedings before the Deputy Collector to be entitled to compensation as Jenmi of Survey No. 54, of which the Government is the registered Jenmi. It is, in my opinion, clear that the Act does not contemplate or provide for the acquisition of any interest which already belongs to Government in land which is being acquired under the Act but only for the acquisition of such interests in the land as do not already belong to Government. When Government claiming to be the owner of the land seeks to acquire under the Act the interests of other persons therein, and such persons deny the title of Government and set up that they themselves are the owners and claim compensation on that basis, it becomes necessary, for the purpose of fixing the compensation to be paid to them, for the Collector to determine what is the interest in the land to which they are entitled, and whether they are owners as they claim to be or only entitled to the limited interest admitted by Government. For this purpose, it is not necessary that the Secretary of State should be made a party and added as a claimant as stated by the Subordinate Judge. The word claimant as used in the Act means a claimant to compensation, see Sections 9 and 11 and Government in proceedings under the Act does not claim compensation. Under Section 11, the Collector has to enquire into the value of the land and the interests of the persons claiming compensation and make an award as to the compensation which, in his opinion, should be allowed for the land. All that the Collector has to do is to award the amount of compensation payable in his opinion to the claimant, that is, the person claiming compensation which will, of course, depend on the conclusion come to by the Collector as to the extent of the claimant's interest in the land. If the claimant objects to the compensation awarded, it is for him to ask for a reference under Section 18, which appears to be the only section applicable, as Section 30, having regard to the language used therein, does not appear to me to apply to a case like this where the question when rightly understood is whether the amount; of the award is insufficient. On the reference under Section 18, notice is to go to the Collector under Section 20 Clause (c) and I do not think it necessary to make the Secretary of State formally a party, as the only quest ion is the amount of compensation payable to the claimant, and as to this the Collector is his statutory representative In this case the Collector has fixed the compensation on the basis that the claimant is not the Jenmi of the land.

2. If he was wrong, the matter can be put right by the Court in the reference under Section 13 and I see no need to send the case back. The order of the Subordinate Judge must be set aside and the case remanded for disposal according to law. Costs will abide the result.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //