Law: Land Acquisition Act, 1894

Section: I,11

Law: Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Section: VII,10

(a)    Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)-------S. 11---Compensation, receipt of---Proof---Trial Court decreed the suit filed by the appellants holding that the acquired land was theirs and directed the respondents to pay to the appellants the compensation they (respondents) had received from the acquiring department--- Validity--- Findings (payment to the appellants) of the Trial Court were not borne out from the case evidence as no "Qabz-ul-Wasool" was produced before the Trial Court by the appellants nor any person from the acquiring department/ Land Acquisition Collector appeared to testify that the respondents had received the compensation which was earmarked for the suit-land---Whenever a Government Department pays any amount or compensation to anyone as landowner, a complete record is maintained, thus it was obligatory to have requested the Trial Court to requisition the acquisition record of their land from the office of concerned Collector so that it could have been made known that the respondents had actually received the compensation---In absence of any record to said effect, no effective finding on the issue that the respondents had received the compensation of the appellant's land could be given for which remand of case was must so that after ascertaining the said fact of the case an effective finding could be returned---No doubt, remand of a case injects a new life of years into the case and same also overburdens the Court but sometimes it becomes necessary as in absence of the material evidence no justice can be administered--High Court set-aside the impugned judgment and decree and remanded the case to decide afresh by requisitioning acquisition record---Appeal was disposed of accordingly.(b)    Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)-------O. VIII, R. 10---Right of defense---Striking off---Scope and effect---Trial Court did not consider the evidence of the defendants on the ground that in absence of pleading, no evidence could be led and looked into---Validity---Record revealed that despite the fact that right of defense of the respondents was struck off but on the very next day they filed their written-statement,…