2003(5) Supreme 154
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Andhra Pradesh High Court)
M.B. Shah & AR. Lakshmanan, JJ.
State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. -Appellants
versus
Marri Venkaiah & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 9520-9522 of 1994
Decided on 28-7-2003
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Appellants : Guntur Prabhakar, Ms. T. Anamika, Advocates.
For the Respondents : A.T.M. Sampath, Ms. T.S. Santhi, V. Balaji and Ms. Rani Chhabra, Advocate (NP)/Advocates.
Held : Plain language of the aforesaid Section would only mean that the period of limitation is three months from the date of the Award of the Court. It is also provided that in computing the period of three months, the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite for obtaining the copy of the award is to be excluded. Therefore, the aforesaid provision crystallizes that application under Section 28A is to be filed within three months from the date of the award by the Court by only excluding the time requisite for obtaining copy. Hence, it is difficult to infer further exclusion of time on the ground of acquisition of knowledge by the applicant. (Para 6)
JUDGMENT
Shah, J.-Short question involved in these appeals is - whether the period of limitation for filing application under Section 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) begins to run from the date of passing of the Award by the Court in a reference filed by a landowner, other than the applicant, whose land was acquired by common notification under Section 4 of the Act or from the date of the knowledge by the applicant of passing of the award by the Civil Court?
2. Admittedly, in the present case notification under Section 4(1) was issued on 16.5.1980 for acquiring land situated in Garedepalli village of Nalgonda District for formation of Command Area Development Ayacut Road under Nagarjunasagar Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 15.1.1982. Some of the landowners filed reference application in respect of lands covered by the Award and the Civil Court in OP 36 of 1984 by order dated 29th November, 1984 enhanced the amount of compensation. Thereafter, on the basis of the said award, respondents filed application under Section 28A of the Act on 27th November, 1989 for enhancement of the compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer by order dated 28th January, 1990 dismissed the said application as barred by limitation under Section 28-A of the Act.
3. That order was challenged by filing writ petitions before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order dated 24th September, 1993 held that three months period prescribed under Section 28-A of the Act have to be computed from the date of the knowledge of the passing of the award and not from the date of the award by Civil Court and thereby directed the appellants to entertain the applications filed by the respondents under Section 28-A of the Act and to deal with them in accordance with law. The High Court further recommended to the Government to bring suitable amendment in the Land Acquisition Act authorising the Land Acquisition Officer or the Collector to send intimation in relation to passing of the award by the Civil Court to the persons interested, who had not sought reference under Section 18 of the Act, to make them know about the said award.
That order is challenged by filing these appeals.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants submitted that the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court is, on the face of it, illegal, erroneous and contrary to specific provisions of Section 28-A of the Act. He also submitted that the question involved is squarely covered by various decisions rendered by this Court on the said issue. As against this, learned counsel appearing on behalf the respondents submitted that Section 28-A is a beneficial legislation so as to give a change to illiterate and poor land owners whose land is acquired by a common notification and who could not approach the Court for one or other reason by filing reference application.
5. For appreciating the above contention, it would be necessary to refer to the relevant part of Section 28-A of the Act, which is as under:-
"28A. Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the basis of the award of the Court.-(1) Where in an award under this Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensation in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by the same notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) and who are also aggrieved by the award of the Collector may, notwithstanding that they had not made an application to the Collector under section 18, by written application to the Collector within three months from the date of the award of the Court require that the amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the Court :
Provided that in computing the period of three months within which an application to the Collector shall be made unde
Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer & Anr.
State of Punjab v. Mst. Qaisar Jehan Begum & Anr.
Tota Ram v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Union of India & Ors. v. Mangatu Ram and Ors.
Jose Antonio Cruz Dos R. Rodriguese & Anr. v. Land Acquisition Collector & Anr.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.