1961 (10) TMI 94

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ty under the Land Acquisition Act (Collector) refers a dispute to the decision of the civil court under section 30 of the Act, firstly, he should he should as the party respondent in the records of the civil court, and secondly whether, in the in any event, costs could be awarded against him. Actually in the matter before me, there appears to have been an ample justification for the officer to mak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he documentary evidence, that the benamidars in whose some of the plots were purchased were not true owners of these properties and that claimant (appellant) was the real owner entitled to compensation amount with the usual solatim. Throughout, the referring officer (Collector) was shown as a party respondent in the record. The learned Subordinate judge awarded costs against the referring officer,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd points out that in England the usual practice is that the acquiring body is not liable for costs incurred by parties with regard to establishing their title, and that in India also the rule is the same. 4. The learned council for the respondent (claimant) urges that the reference itself as incompetent, because there was really no "dispute" within the meaning of the section 30; the cl....