Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from land acquisition proceedings in Punjab. The State of Punjab issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 15 January 1970, acquiring 40 kanals 17 marlas of land in Mohali village, Tehsil Kharar, District Ropar for a public purpose. The Collector made an award under Section 11 on 1 August 1970 determining compensation. The respondent-landowner received notice under Section 12(2) on 22 September 1970, appeared, and received compensation under protest on 29 September 1970. He then filed an application under Section 18 on 21 January 1971 seeking a reference to the civil court for determination of compensation. The Collector rejected the application on 12 January 1973 as barred by limitation, because under Section 18(2) proviso (b) the application should have been made within six weeks from receipt of the notice under Section 12(2), i.e., by early November 1970. The respondent challenged this rejection by way of a civil revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The High Court allowed the revision on 25 April 1977, holding that the notice under Section 12(2) did not contain all details of how the market value of the land was evaluated, and therefore it was not a proper notice and the limitation prescribed by Section 18(2) had no application. The State appealed by special leave to the Supreme Court. The core legal issue before the Supreme Court was whether a notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 must contain all details of the award, including the consideration and manner of determination of compensation, for limitation under Section 18(2) to commence. The Court examined the scheme of Sections 11, 12 and 18. Section 11 required the Collector to determine the true area of the land, the compensation to be allowed, and apportionment among interested persons. Section 12 provided that the award shall be filed in the Collector's office and be final and conclusive evidence of area, value and apportionment. Section 12(2) mandated immediate notice of the award to interested persons not present when the award was made. Section 18 gave an interested person who had not accepted the award the right to seek a reference. Section 18(2) required the application to state grounds of objection and prescribed limitation: if the person was present or represented at the award, within six weeks from the date of the award; in other cases, within six weeks of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or within six months from the date of the award, whichever first expired. The Supreme Court held that a notice under Section 12(2) is only an intimation of the making of the award, requiring the owner or interested person to receive compensation. It need not contain all details of the award, including how market value was evaluated. The statutory limitation under Section 18(2) does not depend on the ministerial act of communication of notice in any particular form when the Act or Rules have not prescribed any form. On receipt of notice, if the interested person receives compensation without protest, no reference is needed. If he receives compensation under protest as contemplated under Section 31, he may either inspect the award, which is conclusive between him and the Collector under Section 12(1), or seek a certified copy. Receipt of compensation and making a reference application are not simultaneous. In the present case, the notice contained the amount awarded and the area acquired was not in dispute. The respondent had admittedly received the notice on 22 September 1970 and filed the application only on 21 January 1971, beyond six weeks. Therefore, the Collector had correctly rejected the application as time-barred. The High Court's contrary view was erroneous. Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court order, and held that the respondent had lost his right of reference due to limitation. No costs were awarded.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Notice Under Section 12(2) - Notice is an intimation of the making of the award and need not contain all details of the award - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 11 and 12(2) - The High Court erroneously held that a notice under Section 12(2) must contain details of how market value was evaluated; on a conjoint reading of Sections 11 and 12, the notice only intimates the making of the award and no particular form is prescribed by the Act or Rules - Held that limitation begins to operate from the moment the notice under Section 12(2) is received, as envisaged by Section 18(2) (Paras 6-7). B) Land Acquisition - Limitation for Reference - Application under Section 18 must be filed within six weeks of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) under proviso (b) first part - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 18(2) proviso (b) - The respondent admittedly received notice on 22.9.1970 and filed the application on 21.1.1971, beyond the six-week period; the Collector correctly rejected the application as time-barred - Held that the High Court erred in holding limitation did not run due to allegedly defective notice; the appeal was allowed and the High Court order set aside (Paras 5-8). C) Land Acquisition - Receipt of Compensation Under Protest - Receipt of compensation under protest under Section 31 is not simultaneous with making a reference application and the interested person may inspect the award or obtain a certified copy - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Sections 12(1), 18(1) and 31 - If compensation is received without protest, no reference is needed; if received under protest, the interested person can inspect the award or seek a certified copy before making objections - Held that statutory limitation under Section 18(2) does not depend on the ministerial act of communication of notice in any particular form; the appeal was allowed and the High Court order set aside with no costs (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a notice issued under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 must contain all details of the award, including evaluation of market value, for limitation under Section 18(2) to commence.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside; respondent's application for reference held barred by limitation; no costs.
Law Points
- A notice under Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 is only an intimation of the making of the award and need not contain all details of the award
- including the consideration and manner of determination of compensation. Limitation for an application under Section 18(2) proviso (b) begins to operate from the moment the notice under Section 12(2) is received
- regardless of the ministerial act of communication in any particular form. Receipt of compensation under protest under Section 31 is not simultaneous with making a reference application
- the interested person may inspect the award or obtain a certified copy.
