P.K. Sreekantan & Ors vs P. Sreekumaran Nair & Ors

Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

The District Collector by his letter dated 18.7.1994 forwarded the relevant records in respect of the matter for determination under Section 18 of the Act. Along with the said letter, the names and addresses of the interested parties, who had filed the reference applications, were also furnished in the separate sheet attached. As per the sheet attached with the said covering letter, the appellant no.1-P.K. Sreekantan submitted his application dated 4.8.1993. Respondent no.1 P. Sreekumaran Nair submitted his application dated 26.8.1993 and the claimants 3, 4 and 5 submitted their applications on 4.8.1993. The reference application dated 4.8.1993 was given by the appellant no.1 pursuant to the receipt of the award notice dated 13.7.1993 whereby the claimant was informed of the compensation awarded for the property acquired from him. In the said reference application it was stated that an extent of 86 Ares and 41 Sq. metres of property out of the total extent of 2 acres and 41 = cents of property comprised in Survey No.1889 of Kadakampally Village was obtained by him by virtue of the partition deed dated 21.2.1975. It was specifically pleaded that the property is situated in an important locality within city limits having road frontage and easy access, it is a building site and a garden land and it shall fetch a minimum market value of Rs.5,000/- per cent. It was further stated that the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer is too low and meager considering the importance of the locality. The award amount was claimed to have been received under protest and, therefore, the Land Acquisition Officer was requested to refer the matter to the Reference Court for adjudicating the land value. Similar claims were made by the other applicants as well. From the reference application so submitted it could be seen that the dispute was only regarding the amount of compensation awarded to the respective land acquired from each one of the applicants, as according to them, amount awarded is low compared to the market value.

Pursuant to the reference so made by the District Collector, the Reference Court issued notice to the parties whereupon the parties filed their respective statements.

Various questions were raised in the appeals which were filed before the High Court. In the appeal filed by the present respondents 1 & 2 it was contended that the Court below has no jurisdiction to go beyond the issues of reference. It had exceeded its jurisdiction in going beyond the issues raised in the reference applications and adjudicating disputes not raised by the parties in the reference applications. The appeal by the present appellant related to the appropriation of the compensation awarded. State's appeal essentially was against the valuation. As noted above, the appeal filed by the respondent Nos. 1 & 2 was allowed with the following observation:-

In the background of the facts situation of the present case, it would be appropriate to permit the appellants to make an application before the competent Land Acquisition Authority seeking reference in terms of Section 30 of the Act. If that is done, the necessary reference shall be made expeditiously. The amount in deposit shall be transmitted to the concerned court. It shall be open to the parties to seek withdrawal of such portion of the awarded amount in deposit on such terms as may be deemed proper by the said Court. Learned counsel for the parties stated that motion shall be moved for getting withdrawal with security. That is an aspect that the concerned court shall deal with in accordance with law.

Appeal is dismissed except to the extent indicated. No costs.