JUDGMENT
1. The claimants in the Land Acquisition Proceedings filed this appeal under SR questioning the award given by the Senior Civil Judge, Jagital, Karimnagar District, in OP No.57 of 1991, dated 22-10-1998.
2. The Registry returned the file by taking objection, i.e., “Certified copy of the impugned decree has to be filed”.
3. The Government Pleader represented the matter stating that on an application filed for the certified copy of the decree the Principal Civil Judge, passed the following order:
“Comply by issuing certified copy of the order in O.P., which is deemed to be a decree.”
4. By stating so, the Government Pleader requested the Court to post the matter on its file.
5. When the matter came up for hearing by order dated 19-02-1999, I called for a report from the concerned Civil Judge. The Officer in his report dated 6-3-1999 stated that the above order was passed by him keeping the Section 26(1) and (2) of the Land Acquisition Act in mind.
6. Now, the question that arises for consideration of the Court would be whether an appeal can be entertained by the High Court without insisting for a certified copy, of the decree, as contemplated under Section 96 of the CPC.
7. Under Section 96 of the CPC an appeal shall lie from every decree passed by any Court exercising original jurisdiction to the Court authorised to hear appeals from the decisions of such Court. It is useful to extract the relevant provisions of the CPC and they are as follows:
Section 2(2): “decree” means the formal expression of an adjudication which, so far as regards the Court expressing it, conclusively determines the rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in controversy in the suit and may be either preliminary or final. It shall be deemed to include the rejection of a plaint and the determination of any question within Section 144, but shall not include-
(a) any adjudication from which an appeal lies as an appeal from an order, or
(b) any order of dismissal for default.
Section 2(9): ”judgment”’ means the statement given by the Judge on the grounds of a decree or order.
Section 2(14): “order” means the formal expression of any decision of a Civil Court which is not a decree.
Order XX, Rule 6: Contents of decree.
6.(1) The decree shall agree with the judgment; it shall contain the number of the suit (the names and descriptions of the parties, their registered addresses) and particulars of the claim, and shall specify clearly the relief granted or other determination of the suit.
(2) The decree shall also state the amount of costs incurred in the suit, and by whom or out of what property and in what proportions such costs are to be paid.
(3) The Court may direct that the costs payable to one party by the other shall be set off against any sum which is admitted or found to be due from the former to the latter.
8. From the above it is seen that a judgment is a formal expression of the decision of a civil Court and it may relate to a decree or an order. While a decree conclusively determines rights of the parties with regard to all or any of the matters in the controvercy in the suit and may either preliminary or final, an order means the formal expression of any decision of a civil Court which is not a decree.
9. Part III of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 deals with reference to Court and procedure thereon.
10. Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, any person who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation the persons to whom it is payable, or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested. Under Section 3 (d), the expression ‘Court’ means a Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction, unless the
appropriate Government has appointed a special judicial officer within any specified local limits to perform the functions of the Court under the Act. As per Section 22, every such proceeding shall take place in open Court, and all persons entitled to practice in any civil Court in the State shall be entitled to appear, plead and act in such proceedings. Section 23 deals with matter to be considered in determining compensation. Section 24 deals with matters to be neglected in determining compensation. Section 25 states that the compensation awarded by the Court shall not be less than the amount awarded by the Collector. We are concerned with Section 26 of the Act and it is extracted hereunder:
“26. Form of Awards :–(1) Every award under this part shall be in writing signed by the Judge, and shall specify the amount awarded under clause first of sub-section (1) of Section 23, and also the amounts (if any) respectively awarded under each of the other clauses of the same sub-section, together with the grounds of awarding each of the said amounts.
(2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree and the statement of the grounds of every such award a judgment within the meaning of Section 2, clause (2), and Section 2, clause (9) respectively, of the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 (5 of 1908).”
11. Under Section 54 of the Act, in any proceedings under the Act, an appeal shall lie to the High Court subject to the provisions of the CPC, 1908, applicable to appeals from original decrees, from the award, or from any part of the award of the Court and from any decree of the High Court, an appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court subject to the provisions contained in Section 110 of the CPC, 1908 and in Order XIV thereof.
12. From Section 18 of the Act, it is seen that the proceedings in a Court will arise on a reference by the LAO not in a suit. Under Section 26(1) of the Act, initially though it was treated as an award, after introduction of sub-section (2) in the above section by amendment No.19/21 by a legal friction (the amendment was brought to set the controvercy that was cropped up on the basis of the language employed under Section 26 and Section 54 of the Act, prior to amendment and to get over the judgment in Rangoon Botatoung Company Limited v. The Collector, Rangoon, 1939 Indian Appeals 197), the award is deemed to be treated as a decree. Hence, under Section 54 of the Act, an appeal shall lie to the High Court from the award or any part of the award as if an appeal can be filed from the original decree under the provisions of the CPC.
13. Same view was taken by a Division Bench of this Court in M Dodla Malliah and others v. The State of Andhra Pradesh through Asst. Collector and Land Acquisition Officer, Warangal, . In that case the question that arose for consideration was whether the appellant has to pay ad velorem Court fee under Section 48 of the Andhra Court Fees and Suits Valuation act, or to pay the Court fee as paid in the lower Court under Section 49 of the Act. The contention of the appellant in that case was that the Act requires payment of Court fee only in case of appeals against decree as such, but not in the case of appeal against adjudications deemed to be decree like the awards passed by the Land Acquisition Court. Though he concedes that Land Acquisition Court is a civil Court, as the award is only an adjudication as to payment of compensation amounting to a decree but not an order. He contends that even if an award under Section 26(2) of the Land Acquisition is deemed to be a decree, it is not a decree within the meaning of CPC and therefore cannot be an order under Section 48 of the Act.
14. Their Lordships having considered the provisions of the CPC as well as the Land Acquisition Act observed as follows:
(16) From a reading of these provisions, the following principles emerge. An enquiry by the Land Acquisition Collector as to the value of the Land and the amount of compensation to be paid for its acquisition resulting in an award is an administrative and not a judicial proceeding, and if the owner of the land desires a judicial ascertainment of the value of the land, he can require the matter to be referred by the Collector to the Court for determination. The Land Acquisition Court is a Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction. The land acquisition proceedings should take place in open Court.
The adjudication by the Court shall be in writing signed by the Judge, and specifying the amount awarded under Section 23(1) and the amounts respectively awarded under the other clauses of the same section, together with the grounds for awarding the amounts. That adjudication is called an “award”, but it is deemed to be a decree, and the statement of the grounds for such an award, a judgment within the meaning of Section 2(2) and 2(9) of the Code of Civil Procedure.”
15. Further as per Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act as stands today after amendment in the year 1921, it is made clear that the award of the Land Acquisition Court shall be deemed to be a decree and the reasons given therein, judgment.
Finally their Lordships concluded as follows:
“Having regard to the above statutory provisions, we are of the opinion that the award under Section 26 of the Land
Acquisition Act is a formal expression of the decision of a Civil Court, and is therefore, an ‘order’ within the meaning of Section 2(14) CPC. It is also a decree by virtue of the deeming provision in Section 26(2) of the said Act.
16. Their Lordships having considered the effect of the deeming provision further held as follows:
“even before the amendment of Section 26 of the Land Acquisition Act, the adjudication of the Land Acquisition Court was and ‘order’, and it has not become a decree within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the CPC. After the amendment, the meaning of the word ‘Order’ has been widened. It removes uncertainty and leaves no scope for doubt and debate involving an ingenious argument that it is not a decree in the ordinary sense, but only an award deemed to be decree. We, therefore hold that it is a decree under the Civil Procedure Code for all purposes. If that is so, it is a decree for purposes of appeal to the High Court.”
17. Hence, I hold that an appeal shall lie to the High Court from the award given by the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction under Section 26 of the Act.
18. However, it is seen from the note submitted by the office that the award passed by the Civil Judge, Jagital in this case do not confirm to the provisions of Order 20, Rule 6 of CPC. Hence, I hold that any award passed by the Civil Court shall be in confirmity with the provisions of Order 20, Rule 6 of CPC for the purpose of execution of the decree or preferring an appeal. In other words, the award shall contain registered addresses of the parties besides their names and descriptions for service of notices either in appeal or in execution proceedings and the detailed
description of the subject matter of the execution proceedings for the purpose of identification apart from quantifying the costs incurred by both the sides and whether the costs are ordered or to be paid or not, etc.
19. As per the report submitted by the Senior Civil Judge, a separate decree has been drafted on 22-10-1998 and the office was directed to issue certified copies to the parties on application.
20. As the award was not in confirmity with the Order 20, Rule 6 of CPC as pointed supra, the Government Pleader is directed to obtain certified copy of the decree and file the same in the Court. On filing the decree, the office is directed to number the appeal.