TMI Blog2006 (8) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the declaration issued under Section 6 of the Act under G.O.Ms. No. 941, Industries (SIF2) dated 18.12.1989 and the award No. 4 of 1991 dated 19.12.1991 of the second respondent and to quash all those proceedings in so far as they related to the land of an extent of 39 cents in Survey No. 671/1, Hosur Village and Taluk. It was their contention in the writ petition that the said land of the extent of 39 cents was developed into a layout of house sites along with other lands and the layout was approved by the Director of Town and Country Planning in DTP approval 53/87-C No. 2122/87 S.D.R.4 and that they had purchased plot Nos. 28, 26, 27, 25, 30 and 31 respectively in the said layout. 3. By an order dated 6.11.2003, the writ petition was allowed in favour of the first and fifth petitioners viz., M. Narasimha Reddy and L. Nachiappan and the entire land acquisition proceedings as against the plots of land purchased by them were set at naught. However, the writ petition was dismissed in so far as the petitioners 2, 3 and 4 viz., G.S. Gopalakrishnan, Tmt. Rajamma and M. Krishnappa were concerned. Therefore, aggrieved by the dismissal of the writ petition, petitioners 2, 3 and 4 in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the property after the award enquiry itself was completed. Hence the present appeal by writ petitioner Nos. 2, 3 and 4. 8. In support of his contention that the notification issued in the name of a dead person was null and void, Mr. A.S. Vijayaraghavan, learned Counsel for the appellants relied upon a judgment of this Court in Muthuswamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu 1993 (1) MLJ 217. In that case, the Government took a stand that the son-in-law of the original owner participated in the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act and represented that the lands were given to him by an oral agreement and mutual understanding and that therefore he was served with notice. In the light of such a stand taken by the Government, it became obvious that the acquiring authority had knowledge of the death of the original owner even during the enquiry under Section 5-A of the Act. Therefore, the learned Judge rejected the stand taken by the Government and held in paragraph-10 of the judgment as follows: Admittedly, the respondents were aware of the fact that the original owner of the lands comprised in S.F. No. 138/12B by name Ramasamy Moopanar, S/o. Muthusamy Moopanar died long before. In spite of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at despite the same, the authorities did not carry out necessary changes in the Section 6 declaration also. In view of such a finding, the Bench quashed the entire proceedings and that too at the instance of the legal heir of the deceased owner. But in the case on hand, the property has changed several hands and the appellants purchased the plots much after the award enquiry was over. It is not the case of the appellants that anyone ever brought to the notice of the acquiring authorities, the fact that the original owner was dead. Under such circumstances it is difficult to comprehend as to how the authorities can be expected to know that the original owner was dead. We are entirely in agreement with the views expressed by the learned Judges in the aforesaid cases, especially in the light of their finding in those cases that the acquiring authorities had knowledge of the death of the owner of the lands. 11. It is true that as a general principle of law, proceedings against dead persons are null and void. But this principle is not without exception. Order 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure which deals with the procedure to be followed in the case of death, marriage and insolvency ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roceeds on the basis that the tenant had ceased to be in occupation of the premises in October 1952, apparently by reason of the fact that he had handed over possession of the premises to the so called lodger or paying guest . Admittedly the petitioner's husband died after October 1952. The occupation by the said Narottamdas Dharamsey Patel was in the nature of an unauthorised occupation. The fact that the petitioner's husband was dead on the date of the order impugned has only this effect that in so far as it mentions his name as one of the persons to be served under Section 13 of the Act should be erased from the order. But even so, it does not affect the enforceability of the same. Section 13 lays down the different modes of service of an order passed under the Act according as the order is of a general nature or affecting a class of persons or an individual, corporation or firm. We are here concerned with the case of an individual and the section lays down that it can be served either personally by delivering or tendering the order to him or by post or where he cannot be found, by affixing a copy of the order to some conspicuous part of the premises in which he is kn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
