Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/9151/2008 5/ 5 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9151 of 2008
=========================================================
KASAMBHAI
HAJIBHAI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
SPECIAL
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER & 2 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
YH MOTIRAMANI for
Petitioner(s) : 1, 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3,1.2.4
None for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
MR SUNIL K SHAH for Respondent(s) :
3,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date
: 17/11/2008
ORAL
ORDER
By
way of this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India,
the petitioners ? original land
owners have prayed for appropriate writ, order and/or
direction quashing and setting aside the order dtd.27/2/2008 passed
by the Special Judge, Land Acquisition References, Ahmedabad (Rural)
below application Ex.97 in Land Acquisition Reference No.405 of
1995, by which the learned trial court has dismissed the said
application made by the petitioners herein ? original claimant
for deciding the liability of the payment of the interest upon the
advocate ? Mr.Natubhai P.Patel on the ground that on his
objection, the payment was delayed and the petitioners have suffered
loss of interest.
It
appears from the record that the petitioners were represented by one
Mr.Natubhai P. Patel, learned advocate before the learned trial
court and said Mr.Natubhai P.Patel fought litigation of Land
Acquisition Reference No.405 of 1995 on behalf of the petitioners
till the judgement and award came to be passed by the Reference
Court, and subsequently the entire amount of compensation came to
be deposited as per the Judgement and Award passed by the Reference
Court. However, at the time of withdrawal of the amount, the
petitioners discharged and/or relieved Mr.Natubhai P. Patel, who was
representing the case and engaged another lawyer. As the
professional fees were not paid, the said advocate submitted
purshish before the trial court raising objections for restraining
the original claimants from withdrawing the amount of compensation
and subsequently, the said objections were considered by the learned
trial court and the trial court passed the order dtd.27/2/2007
directing to withhold / pay Rs.3 Lacs to Mr.Natubhai P. Patel,
advocate and the balance amount was directed to be paid to the
original claimants ? petitioners herein. The said order is subject
matter of Special Civil Application No.5050 of 2008 and the same
will be dealt with by separate order. According to the petitioners,
the time is consumed and delay is caused in payment of compensation
to the petitioners ? original claimants due to the objections
raised by the respondent No.3 herein ? Mr.Natubhai P. Patel,
advocate and, therefore, the petitioners submitted application Ex.97
requesting the trial court to direct the said Natubhai P.Patel,
advocate to pay interest from the due date or from the date of
filing of the withdrawal purshish. The said application came to be
dismissed by the trial court by the impugned order and hence the
petitioners ? original claimants have preferred present Special
Civil Application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
Mr.Moti
Ramani, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has
submitted that because of the frivolous objections raised by the
respondent No.3 ? Mr.Natubhai P.Patel, advocate, there was delay
in getting the compensation by the petitioners and the petitioners
have suffered loss of interest on the compensation and therefore,
the learned trial court ought to have allowed the application
Ex.97 deciding the liability of payment of interest from the date of
filing of interest. Submitting at is requested to allow the present
Special Civil Application.
Having
heard the learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners
and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears
that such an application for saddling the liability of payment of
interest has been rightly rejected by the learned trial court.
Unless and until evidence is lead in an appropriate substantive
proceedings for deciding the liability of payment of interest and
for deciding the issue as to who is responsible and whether the
objections raised by Mr.Natubhai P.Patel, advocate were frivolous or
not and from when and at what rate the interest is to be paid,
Mr.Natubhai P.Patel cannot be saddled with the liability of
interest, as all the aforesaid questions are required to be
considered in an appropriate substantive proceedings. Under the
circumstance, it cannot be said that the learned trial court has
committed any error in dismissing the said application.
For
the reasons stated above, there is no substance in the present
Special Civil Application, and the same deserves to be dismissed and
is accordingly dismissed. However, it is observed that dismissal of
the present Special Civil Application would not come in the way of
the petitioners ? original claimants to initiate appropriate
substantive proceedings before the appropriate court / forum. With
the aforesaid observations and directions, present Special Civil
Application is dismissed.
[M.R.
SHAH, J.]
rafik
Top