M. S. LIBERHAN, C. J.

( 1 ) PRISTINE question referred to the Full bench is:- "whether a notice from the Court in the proceedings under Section 30 could be equated with the notice of the Collector under Section 18 (2){b)? The question was posed by the Division Bench in view of the fact that it was not considered by the division Bench in the light of the mandatory duty cast on the Collector under section 12 (2) to give notice of award. "

( 2 ) LAND in dispute was acquired on 12-7-1989. Notification dated 13-7-1989, under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the act ) was issued. During pendency of the proceedings, respondents-writ petitioners filed their claim petition for compensation contending that they have purchased the land in dispute from the owners, who denied their claim. The Land Acquisition collector gave his award number 3/91 dated 8-2-1991, fixing the value and measurement of land. Dispute with respect to title and apportionment was referred to the arbitrator under Section 30 of the Act. Compensation payable to the rightful claimants was deposited in Court. Claim to title was compromised vide, LA. 822/92, and compromise decree was pass

Click Here to Read the rest of this document