Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
DEEPAK GUPTA
Sh.Dayal Singh (Since Deceased) Through Lr Sham Singh – Appellant
Versus
Ludhiana Improvement Trust – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.
LAC-58-1982 titled Shri Dayal Singh vs. Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana and another, arising out of a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was dismissed in default by the President, Land Acquisition Tribunal, Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana, vide order dated 16.03.1983 (Annexure P-4). Sham Singh, son of Dayal Singh, moved an application for restoration of the said reference on 27.07.2012 along with an application under Sections 5 read with Section 14 of the Limitation Act, 1963, seeking condonation of delay. Both applications were dismissed by the learned Tribunal vide order dated 24.05.2018 (Annexure P-11), which is assailed in the present revision.
2. As borne out from the record, Dayal Singh was the original owner of land measuring 117 kanals 15 marlas situated in village Haibowal Khurd, Tehsil and District Ludhiana. The said land was acquired by the State Government pursuant to a development scheme framed by the Ludhiana Improvement Trust known as the “256 Acres Development Scheme”, under Sections 24 and 28 (2) of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922. Notification under Section 42 was issued on 24.11.1978, followed b
Limitation for making reference under Section 18 of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 cannot be extended and Section 5 of Limitation Act shall not be applicable.
The Referral Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a reference made outside the statutory limit prescribed by the Land Acquisition Act, reinforcing the mandatory nature of compliance with statutory t....
Advocates appeared :For the Appellant : Brij Mohan Prasad For the Respondent : Dharmendra Kaurab, Akshit Arjaria
A dismissal of a compensation claim on technical grounds does not preclude a subsequent application for re-determination under Section 28-A, provided the earlier claim was not adjudicated on merits.
The limitation period under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act is strict and cannot be extended based on personal circumstances or knowledge of the judgment.
The main legal point established is that the reference Court must decide the claim on merits and determine the market value afresh based on the material produced before it, following the guidelines s....
The Reference Court exceeded its jurisdiction by awarding compensation after an excessive delay, which rendered the application time-barred under Article 137 of the Limitation Act.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
