Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR
DWARKA DHISH BANSAL
Takhat Singh – Appellant
Versus
Executive Engineer – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This civil revision has been preferred by the petitioners/claimants/land owners challenging the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by Additional Judge to the Court of First District Judge, Begamganj, District Raisen in MJC No.51/2023 whereby reference made by the Collector/Land Acquisition Officer, Raisen has been dismissed by the District Judge under Order VII Rule 11 CPC holding it to be barred by limitation.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that award was passed by Land Acquisition Officer (in short ‘LAO’) on 31.12.2013 and after passing of the award by LAO, no notice as required under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (in short ‘the Act’) was served on the petitioners, therefore, they were not aware of the contents of the award and when the cheques were delivered to the petitioners on 21/25.08.2014, then only they became aware of the award passed by LAO, thereafter they applied for certified copy of the award passed by LAO and made application to the Collector on 28.01.2015 within a period of six months, which was rightly referred by the Collector to the District Judge vide order dated 09.09.2019, with the request to the District Judge to decide
The court must decide land acquisition reference applications on merits, with limitation issues addressed only after proper issue framing.
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....
The duty of the Collector to provide notice and award to the affected parties and the necessity of framing the issue of limitation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act.
Courts must verify that references under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act comply with statutory conditions for jurisdiction.
The Reference Court's jurisdiction is confined to the objections referred by the Collector, and it cannot dismiss proceedings based on irrelevant technical grounds.
The Reference Court must consider actual or constructive knowledge of the award's contents when determining limitation and cannot dismiss proceedings based on irrelevant grounds.
The Reference Court's jurisdiction is limited to the objections referred by the Collector, and it cannot dismiss proceedings on irrelevant grounds.
Timely communication of the award's contents is mandatory; failure results in the reinstatement of claims despite delays in processing.
The District Court cannot question the validity of a reference made by the Collector under the Land Acquisition Act once jurisdiction is established.
The limitation period for filing a reference petition under the Land Acquisition Act begins when the landowner has actual knowledge of the award's contents, not merely from the award's passing date.
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
