Limitation for land reference under Land acquisition Act

The learned A.G.P. appearing for the State submits that, on 22nd August, 2012 notice under section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was served upon the applicants, however, said was not accompanied with the copy of the Award. The contention raised by the applicant on 10th June, 

2013 that, copy of the award was applied by them 

on 2nd November, 2012 and same was received by them on 9th November, 2012. After knowing the 

contents of the award immediately they have filed Reference on 19th November, 2012 deserves to be accepted. Accordingly, in the light of the 

judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of 

Premji Nathu vs. State of Gujrat and another 

[2012(5) SCC 250], Reference filed by the applicant from the date of knowing contents of the 

award i.e. 9th November, 2012 will have to be 

treated within period of limitation. Since the applicants came to know about the contents of the 

award on 9th November, 2012 and they filed Reference on 19th November, 2012, Reference is within period of limitation.

Bombay High Court

Madhav s/o Gundaji Shingade, v State of Maharashtra on 11 July, 2013

Bench: S. S. Shinde

Citation; 2014 (1) MHLJ 458

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing H
for the parties, the application is taken up for final disposal.
y
ba

2. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the parties. This Civil Revision Application was om
extensively heard on 10th June, 2013 and arguments of the Counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.P. were recorded. The order dated 10th June, B
2013 reads thus ;
"1. Heard learned Counsel for the revision applicants. He submits that initially, award ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2013 23:22:03 ::: 3 cra44.13 was passed on 31st March, 2012. However, there were certain queries. Therefore, after rt
removal of those queries, the award was signed on 7th August, 2012 and notice was ou
issued to the applicants on 14th August, 2013, which was received on 22nd August, 2012. The applicants were present in the C
office of the Land Acquisition Officer on 22nd August, 2012. However, the L.A.O. was not present in the office. On 10th October, 2012 when payment was made to the applicants, h
it is specific contention of the Counsel for ig
the applicants that no copy of the award was supplied to the applicants. On 2nd November, H
2012, certified copy was applied and the same was received on 9th November, 2012 and the applicants filed references on 19th November, 2012. He submits that when the award was y
passed by the concerned Officer, the ba
applicants were not present. The learned Counsel for the applicants pressed into service reported judgment of the Supreme om
Court in case of Premji Nathu vs. State of Gujarat and another [2012(5) SCC 250] and submitted that knowledge of the award does not mean a mere knowledge of the fact that an B
award has been made. The knowledge must relate to the essential contents of the award. He submits that after receiving copy of the award on 9th November, 2012, the applicants learnt about the contents of the ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2013 23:22:03 ::: 4 cra44.13 award and thereafter, immediately on 19th November, 2012 reference was filed. He rt
invited my attention to the paragraphs 11 and 13 of the judgment cited supra and submitted ou
that from the date of receipt of copy of the award, reference has been filed by the applicants within limitation. Therefore, he C
submits that the reference could not have been rejected on the ground of limitation.
2. The learned AGP appearing for the State h
concedes this legal position stated in case ig
of Premji Nathu (supra). However, he submits that before this matter is disposed H
of, it is necessary to verify the statements of the applicants that on the date of on which award was passed, the applicants were not present and they had no constructive y
knowledge about the award. ba

3. At the request of the learned AGP, S.O. to 18th June, 2013. To be treated as part om
heard."
B

3. The learned A.G.P. appearing for the State submits that, on 22nd August, 2012 notice under section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act was served upon the applicants, however, said was ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2013 23:22:03 ::: 5 cra44.13 not accompanied with the copy of the Award. The contention raised by the applicant on 10th June, rt
2013 that, copy of the award was applied by them ou
on 2nd November, 2012 and same was received by them on 9th November, 2012. After knowing the C
contents of the award immediately they have filed Reference on 19th November, 2012 deserves to be accepted. Accordingly, in the light of the h
judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of ig
Premji Nathu vs. State of Gujrat and another H
[2012(5) SCC 250], Reference filed by the applicant from the date of knowing contents of the y
award i.e. 9th November, 2012 will have to be ba
treated within period of limitation. Since the applicants came to know about the contents of the om
award on 9th November, 2012 and they filed Reference on 19th November, 2012, Reference is within period of limitation. B

4. In the light of above, the order dated 10th December, 2012 passed by the Sub Divisional Officer cum Land Acquisition Officer, Nilanga is ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2013 23:22:03 ::: 6 cra44.13 quashed and set aside. The said authority is directed to forward Reference of the applicants to rt
the competent Court within one month from today. ou
Rule made absolute on above terms. The Civil Revision Application stands disposed of on above C
terms.
sd/-
[S.S. SHINDE, J.]

Print Page