1. The plaintiff in L A.R. No. 48 of 1957 of the District Court of Quilon is the petitioner before us. The award concerned was made on 14-2-1953.

2. The reference was dismissed by the District Judge on the ground that it was made after the expiry of the period of two months prescribed by proviso (b) to sub-section (2) of S.18 of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, 1089. The question for determination is whether he had the jurisdiction to do so.

3. The period prescribed in proviso (b) to sub-section (2) of S.18 of the (Indian) Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is six weeks, and not two months as provided in proviso (b) to sub-section (2) of S.18 of the Travancore Land Acquisition Act, 1089. There are some other differences also in the wording of the two sections; but as far as the question of jurisdiction arising before us is concerned, they can be considered as identical.

4. The petition for reference itself discloses, quite clearly, that it was filed beyond the period prescribed. It states that the notice was received by the petitioner on 15-4-1953. The petition for reference is dated 13-7-1953 and was filed on the next day, on 14-7-1953.

5. The petition appears to have been su