Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from compulsory acquisition of land belonging to the appellant Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh in village Beljuri, District Nainital, for a public purpose. Notifications under Sections 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 were issued, Section 17 was applied, and possession was taken. The Collector made an award determining compensation on March 25, 1951, signed and filed it in his office, but failed to give notice of the award to the appellant as required by Section 12(2). The appellant came to know of the award only on or about January 13, 1953, and on February 24, 1953, filed an application under Section 18 requesting reference to the civil court because the compensation was inadequate. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer rejected the application as time-barred under the proviso to Section 18, which prescribes that a person not present at the award must apply within six weeks of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) or within six months from the date of the award, whichever expires first. The appellant filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court; a single judge allowed it and directed the officer to treat the application as within time, but a Division Bench reversed, holding the application barred by six months from the date of award. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The main legal issue was the interpretation of 'the date of the Collector's award' in the proviso to Section 18. The appellant contended that the award was not effective until communicated and that 'date of award' should mean the date of communication or knowledge; otherwise the right to reference would be defeated when no notice is given. The respondent relied on literal construction that the award was made on the date it was signed and filed. The Supreme Court examined the scheme of the Act, noting that the award under Section 12 is legally an offer or tender of compensation, not a decision binding on the owner. It held that making of the award does not consist merely in physical writing, signing or filing; it also involves communication to the owner either actually or constructively. Therefore, the expression 'the date of the award' means the date when the award is communicated to the owner or known by him. Applying this interpretation, the Court held the appellant's application was within six months of his knowledge and therefore not barred. The Court allowed the appeals and set aside the High Court order, directing that the application under Section 18 be dealt with on merits.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Limitation - Application for Reference - Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 18 proviso - The Collector's award is not a decision but an offer of compensation on behalf of the Government; it is not effective until communicated to the owner, and the making of the award includes communication either actually or constructively - The appellant filed an application under Section 18 within six months of coming to know of the award, but the High Court held it time-barred by literal construction of 'date of award' as date of signing and filing; Supreme Court held that such construction would render the statutory right to reference ineffective in cases where no notice under Section 12(2) was given, and interpreted 'date of award' to mean date when the award is communicated to or known by the owner. Held that the application was within time and the Deputy Land Acquisition Officer must treat it as filed in time and deal with it on merits (Paras Not mentioned).
Issue of Consideration
Whether an application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 filed more than six months after the Collector signed and filed the award but within six months of the applicant's knowledge of the award was barred by limitation under the proviso to Section 18; and whether 'date of the Collector's award' in the proviso means date of physical preparation/filing or date of communication/knowledge.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's order, and held that the appellant's application under Section 18 was within time. The expression 'the date of the award' in the proviso to Section 18 means the date when the award is communicated to the owner or known by him either actually or constructively. The Deputy Land Acquisition Officer was directed to treat the application as filed in time and deal with it on merits.
Law Points
- A Collector's award under Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 is an offer of compensation
- not a decision
- it becomes effective only when communicated actually or constructively
- the expression 'date of the award' in proviso to Section 18 means date of communication or knowledge
- literal construction causing injustice to be avoided
- a person's right to seek reference under Section 18 cannot be rendered ineffective without notice under Section 12(2).
