Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 120 (HP)

AMAR NATH v. COLLECTOR, LAND ACQUISITION, MANDI

2001-06-28

M.R.VERMA

body2001
JUDGMENT M.R. Verma, (Oral):-This revision petition is directed against the order dated 2.3.2000 passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi whereby the records of Reference No. 5/96 titled Amar Nath versus Collector and another has been ordered to be consigned to the records. 2. The relevant and material facts are that the aforesaid Reference Petition was pending in the Court of the learned District Judge, Mandi and was fixed for evidence of the petitioner on 2.3.2000. However, on that day the petitioner failed to lead his evidence and was also not personally present to make his statement. Therefore, the learned District Judge observed that there was hardly any good reason for adjourning the matter for recording evidence of the petitioner and accordingly ordered that "this matter is ordered I to be consigned to records". Being aggrieved, the petitioner has preferred the present revision petition. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Advocate General for the respondents and have also perused the records. 4. As is evident from the order passed by the Court below, the reference has not been answered in any manner nor has been dismissed for want of prosecution but simply the file has been ordered to be consigned to the record room. Evidently, the order passed by the learned District Judge is illegal and contrary to law. By virtue of the provisions of Section 53 of the Land Acquisition Act, the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure in general are applicable to the proceedings in a Reference under Section 18 of the said Act. In case the learned District Judge was satisfied that the petitioner was negligent in the prosecution of his case and had defaulted in producing his evidence despite opportunity, the appropriate course for the learned District Judge was to proceed in the manner as provided under Order 17 Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure and to pass a decisive order in the Reference Petition instead of directing the consignment of the records. The impugned order, therefore, being illegal, is liable to be set aside. 5. As a result, this revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The impugned order, therefore, being illegal, is liable to be set aside. 5. As a result, this revision petition is allowed and the impugned order is set aside. The Court below is directed to re-register the Reference against its old number and date and then give one last opportunity to the petitioner to lead his evidence and if assistance of the Court is required by the petitioner to secure the presence of his witnesses, such assistance be given to him in accordance with law and thereafter to proceed in the mater and to dispose of the Reference in accordance with law. 6. The parties are directed to appear before the Court below on 25.7.2001.