Dal Chand vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 18 February, 2005

0
47
Delhi High Court
Dal Chand vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 18 February, 2005
Author: B Patel
Bench: B Patel, S K Kaul

JUDGMENT

B.C. Patel, C.J.

1. This appeal arises out of the judgment delivered by the Additional District Judge on 28th November, 1981 in LAC No. 58/80 on a reference being made by the Land Acquisition Collector under Section 30/31 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

2. After following the procedure laid down in the Act the Land Acquisition Collector made award and forwarded an amount of Rs. 48,702.50 in view of the fact that Dal Chand and Khushi Ram were claiming the amount. After considering the claims by respective claimants the reference court held that Dal Chand is entitled to 1/4th amount of compensation and Khushi Ram is entitled to get 1/2 of the compensation. Interestingly 1/4th amount of compensation remaining was remitted back to the Collector by the court. The court came to the conclusion that one Net Ram was also entitled being a co-sharer with the present appellant and should be given 1/2 share of that portion which comes to 1/4th to Net Ram and 1/4th to appellant.

3. There was no claim made by Net Ram and therefore there was no reason for the court to entertain the claim on his behalf. On instructions it is stated by the learned counsel for the Collector that the amount is still lying with the court.

4. We have perused the judgment delivered by the trial court and we are of the opinion that when there is no claim before the court there was no question of keeping the amount aside for a person who has never claimed the amount. We are informed that till today he has not claimed the amount. Once it is found that Dal Chand and Net Ram were in joint possession as co-sharers and when only Dal Chand and Khushi Ram came before the court in view of the claim made before the Land Acquisition Collector it will be these two parties entitled to claim. It is always open for a real claimant to claim the amount from the person who has taken amount from the court but in absence of any claim being made by such a person it is difficult to understand how 1/4th amount should be kept apart.

5. The respondent has no objection in releasing the amount in favor of the appellant of that 1/4th share and that being the only question pressed by the counsel appearing for the appellant, we are of the opinion that entire 1/2 share as determined should go to the appellant. Appeal stands partly allowed accordingly. The amount of 1/4th share may be released to the appellant with interest, if any, accrued thereon.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here