Choor Singh (Commissioner of Appeals) J:

This is an interlocutory application made by the appellants under regulation 8 of the Land Acquisition (Appeals Board) Regulations 1967 for "permission to proceed with the appeal herein by virtue of s. 23(3) of the Act notwithstanding that the notice of appeal was not lodged within the time limited therefor."

The facts of this case are simple and are not in dispute but in order to fully appreciate the merits of this application which is in the nature of a test case it is necessary to set out the facts in some detail. The appellants are the legal personal representatives of the late Tan Chwee Boon who was the registered owner of Lot 100-10 pt. of Mukim III containing an area of 7,875 square feet (hereinafter referred to as "the land"). On the 12th November, 1965, there was published in the Government Gazette a declaration made under s. 5 of the Land Acquisition Ordinance (Cap. 248) to the effect that the land was required by Government for a public purpose. Proceedings for the acquisition of the land were taken in due course and the Collector of Land Revenue held the usual inquiry in compliance with the provisions of s. 10 of the Land Acquisition Ordinance (Cap. 248). On the 23rd June, 1966, the collector awarded a sum of $9,450 as compensation in respect of the land acquired. On the 26th July, 1966, the appellants' solicitors wrote to the collector informing him that their clients were not accepting the award of $9,450 and requested him to refer the matter for the Court's determination under s. 19 of the Land Acquisition Ordinance (Cap. 248).

At the date of the collector's award that is, 23rd June, 1966, there was in force the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Ordinance, 1964, and s. 2 of that Ordinance provided as follows:

During the continuance in force of this Ordinance -

(a) no person interested shall be entitled to require the collector, under the provision of subsection (1) of s. 19 of the Land Acquisition Ordinance, to refer the matter for the determination of the Court.

Accordingly by virtue of the above provisions the collector could not in law be required to refer the matter for the Court's determination and although the appellants' solicitors did in fact request him to do so, he did nothing about it. The matter lay in abeyance until the coming into force of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966 which repealed the Land Acquisition Ordinance (Cap. 248) and the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Ordinance, 1964.

The Land Acquisition Act. 1966, came into force on the 17th June, 1967, and on the same day the collector wrote to the appellants' solicitors as follows:

With reference to your written application made on 26th July, 1966, requiring the matter of the award made on 23rd June, 1966 in respect of the land noted below to be referred to Court, please note that the said application will not be taken cognizance of as it was made during the continuance in force of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Ordinance, 1964, under which you were not entitled to require the collector to refer the matter for the determination of the Court.

2. I am now to inform you that the Land Acquisition Act, 1966 (No. 41 of 1966) has been brought into operation, on 17th June, 1967.

3. By virtue of the provisions of sub-section (5) of s. 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1966, you may appeal to the Appeals Board constituted under this Act by complying with the said provisions. A copy of this section is attached.

4. If you wish to lodge an appeal the amount of deposit required of you is $3,150."

On 12th July, 1967, the appellants' solicitors sent a cheque for $3,150 to the Accountant-General, Singapore, "in payment of the deposit as required by s. 23(1)(b) of the Act". A copy of the letter forwarding the cheque was sent to the Registrar of the Appeals Board on the 26th July, 1967, the Registrar wrote to the appellants' solicitors., inter alia:

3. I have so far not received any notice of appeal in respect of