Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pran Sukh vs State Of Haryana on 8 July, 2003
Equivalent citations: (2003)135PLR519
JUDGMENT Binod Kumar Roy, C.J.
1. The petitioner assails validity of the order dated February 18, 2003 passed by the learned District Judge, Gurgaon, rejecting his prayer for issuance of a direction by him to his office to supply free of charges copy of the award dated February 05, 2003 prepared under the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).
2. A perusal of the impugned order shows that on behalf of the petitioner reliance was placed on Section 51 of the Act, whereas on behalf of the office reliance was placed on alleged Note 6-B of a Book written by a former Judge of a High Court titled "The law of Land Acquisition and Compensation", which found favour of the learned District Judge.
3. Shri Shailendra Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contended that a bare perusal of Section 51 of the Act makes it abundantly clear that a person who is claiming under such an award is not required to pay any fee for a copy of the same. Had there been any doubt, the Legislature itself would have made amendment in Section 51 of the Act. The learned District, Judge has completely mis-conceived alleged Note 6-B,which does not deal with the matter. Accordingly, the learned District Judge has erred in refusing to exercise his jurisdiction and thus, the impugned order be set aside.
4. Shri Randhir Singh, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, representing the State very fairly and in my view correctly concedes that having regard to the object enshrined under Section 51 of the Act, a copy of the award was required to be supplied without charging any fee.
5. Section 51 of the Act, reads as follows;-
"51. Exemption from stamp duty and fees.- No award or agreement made under this Act shall be chargeable with stamp duty and no person claiming under any such award or agreement shall be liable to pay any fee for a copy of the same."
6. The -alleged Note 6-B as referred to in the impugned order reads as follows;-
"6-B Copies of Typewritten judgments when to be made available.- Where the judgment is type written, copies of the typewritten judgment shall, where it is practicable so as to do, be made available to the parties immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment on payment, by the party applying for the copy, of such charges as may be specified in the Rules made by the High Court."
7. This Note really referred to Order X Rule 6B of the Code of Civil Procedure inserted by Act 104 of 1976 w.e.f. 1.2.1977 which reads as follows:-
"6B. Copies of judgments when to be made available.- Where the judgment is pronounced, copies of the judgment shall be made available to the parties, immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment for preferring an appeal on payment of such charges as may be specified in the rule made by the High Court."
8. In my view, this does not control Section 51 of the Act. Thus, a person is entitled to have a copy of the award prepared under the provisions of the Act free of cost irrespective of the fact whether he intends to file an appeal under Section 54 of the Act or not.
9. This Civil Revision Application is allowed, the impugned order is set aside and the learned District Jude is directed to see that a copy of the award in question is prepared and handed over to the petitioner expeditiously preferably within one week from the date of receipt of copy of the order from any quarter whatsoever.
10. In view of the fact that a fair stand has been taken by the learned Sr. Deputy Advocate General, I make no order as to costs.
11. Let a copy of this order be sent down.