1. In both these appeals, on behalf of the claimant appellant, Mr. Thomas V. Jacob learned counsel challenges the award of the learned District Judge of Quilon declining to consider the claim for enhanced compensation, on the ground that the applications filed by the appellant under S.18 of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, seeking a reference to the Civil Court, are barred by limitation.

2. The subject-matter of the two appeals relates to the acquisition of certain lands belonging to the appellant, who is the same in both the appeals, for the purpose of constructing the Omalloor Upper Primary School. Inasmuch as the two acquisitions were made for the same purpose, they were the subject of two references to the Civil Court, namely LAR. Nos. 31 and 32 of 1960. The award itself was on 28 3

1960, and the applications filed by the appellant seeking a reference to the Civil Court under S.18 of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, are Exx. D-5 and D-9.

3. Pausing here for a minute, it is necessary to refer to the period of limitation provided for under S.18(2) proviso of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, under which these two acquisitions were made. Unfortunately the learned District Judge, to whom the references were made, has proceeded on the basis that it is the proviso to S.18(2) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (Central Act I of 1894), that applies; and it is on that basis that he has ultimately considered the question as to whether the applications made for reference are barred by limitation or not. And it is on that basis also that the learned District Judge has ultimately held that the applications filed by the appellant are barred by limitation. There has been a misconception in the mind of the learned District Judge regarding the exact statute that applies, because the acquisition being under the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, the period of limitation for making a reference, is as provided for in the proviso to S.18(2) of the said Act. No doubt the learned Govt. Pleader pointed out that though the learned District Judge has considered the question only from the pont of view of S.18 of the Central Act, even applying the provisions of the Travancore Act, the applications filed by the appellant are barred by limitation. This aspect will be considered by me in the latter part of this judgment.

4. I have already stated that it is desirable to refer to the proviso to subsection (2) of S.18 of the Travancore Act, which prescribes, under particular circumstances, the period within which an application for reference to the Civil Court is to be made by a party. Clause (a) of the said proviso does not come into the picture at all for the purposes of these appeals. It is only the first part of clause (b) of the proviso that applies to the matters on hand. Under that part of clause (b), the party should file an application asking for reference, within two months of the receipt of the notice from the Division Peishkar under S.12, sub-section (2).

5. In the present case, the award itself was passed on 28 31960. It is also established that as contemplated in sub-section (2) of S.12 of the Act, notice of the award has been personally served on the appellant in both the appeals, on 7 41960. Therefore, inasmuch as the notice has been served under S.12, subsection (2), it follows that under the first part of clause (b) of the proviso to S.18(2), the appellant in both these appeals should have applied to the Collector for making a reference to the Civil Court within two months of the receipt of the notice, which was on 7 41960, and therefore the last date for filing the applications was 7 61960.

6. In,both these matters, it is seen that the appellant has no doubt submitted two applications, namely Exx. D-5 and D-9, requesting the Officer to refer the claim for enhanced compensation to the Civil Court. These applications do not bear any date; on the other hand, there are the initials of the Officer who, according to the State, re