The knowledge of the essential contents of the award and the obligation to file a reference petition within the prescribed time are crucial for a valid reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.

HARKESH MANUJA, J.

CM-582-CI-2023 in RFA-442-2015

Present application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 is merely an attempt to correct the course of action at a belated stage. If application for amendment as sought for is allowed, which removes the basis of the order of a Court, then Appellate Court will be flooded with such requests and would make the hearing before the lower Court redundant. The futility of this amendment application is also substantiated from the fact that the present appeal is pending before this Court since 2015 while the amendment application has been filed in 2023, and thus, the same is dismissed.

MAIN CASE :

1. Present appeal has been filed against the decision dated 25.08.2014 passed by Ld. Additional District Judge, Gurgaon (hereinafter referred to as ‘Reference Court’); whereby reference filed by the appellants Under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred as ‘1894 Act’) against the award dated 24.01.2007 was dismissed on the ground of limitation.

2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that notification under Section 4 of 1894 Act was issued on 27.09.2005 through which 819K 6M land, including that of the appellants, of Village Kasan, Tehsil and District Gurgaon was sought to be acquired, for public purpose, namely, setting up of Ch. Devi Lal Industrial Model Township, Manesar and completing the infrastructure facilities as well as other public utilities such as roads, water supply, sewerage, electrification, drainage, transport hub, communication etc. Declaration under Section 6 of the 1894 Act was issued on 02.06.2006 & subsequently on 24.01.2007, Land Acquisition Collector (for short ‘LAC’) announced Award No.4 dated 24.01.2007 whereby the landowners were awarded compensation @ Rs.12.5 lac per acre for all kinds of land. Aggrieved thereof, the appellants preferred reference petition before LAC on 26.03.2010, who, in turn, forwarded the same to the Reference Court for its adjudication in exercise of powers under Section 18 of the 1894 Act.

3. The Reference Court dismissed the petition vide its award dated 25.08.2014 on the point of limitation, disbelieving the version of appellants for delay, primarily on the ground that in cross-examination he admitted the factum of having received notice of acquisition as well as notice pertaining to the compensation. It would also be appropriate to mention here that the Reference Court also found that compensation was received by the appellants on 08.02.2007 and thus, the reference filed on 26.3.2010 was beyond limitation.

4. Impugning the aforesaid Award dated 25.08.2014, learned Senior counsel for the appellants has made comprehensive arguments. Learned Senior counsel submits that land acquisition is a special enactment for the purpose of acquiring the land by the State and special procedure specified in the 1894 Act has to be followed. He further submits that State while filing written statement before the reference Court did not mention anywhere that the appellants had knowledge of the award and no specific issue in this regard was framed as such. He further submits that even if it was admitted that the compensation under the award was received by the appellant on 08.02.2007, it cannot be presumed that he had the knowledge of contents thereof, as in view of Section 31(1) of 1894 Act, it is obligatory for the LAC to tender amount and it nowhere relates to the service of notice of award and specifically its content. He further points out that all the Sections of 1894 Act are independent to each other and they are not inter-dependent and even Section 18, which pertains to filing of reference petitions is independent and has no bearing on payout of compensation. For further arguments he refers to Section 18 of the 1894 Act which is reproduced below:-

“18. Reference to Court. - (1) Any person interested who has not accepted the award may, by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determin