Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mr. Valmiki Faleiro, filed a writ petition challenging an order dated 02.02.2012 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao, whereby the registration of a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 made by the Land Acquisition Officer was rejected. The petitioner claimed right to property surveyed under No.194/1 of Raia Village, which was acquired and compensation paid to respondent no.2 (Communidade of Raia) without right. The petitioner learned about the award on 19.09.2011 and filed a reference under Section 30 on 12.10.2011. The Land Acquisition Officer made a reference to the District Judge, but the learned Additional District Judge refused to register the reference and returned it to the Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner contended that the reference under Section 30 is not an application under the Limitation Act, 1963, and Article 137 does not apply. The court held that the reference under Section 30 is a statutory reference made by the Collector and not an application under the Limitation Act. The limitation for such reference is governed by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which provides that the reference can be made at any time before the Collector makes payment of compensation to the persons interested. The court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the learned Additional District Judge for fresh consideration, directing that the reference be registered and decided on merits in accordance with law.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Reference under Section 30 - Limitation - Article 137 of Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - The reference is not an application under the Limitation Act but a statutory reference made by the Collector - The limitation for such reference is governed by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which provides that the reference can be made at any time before the Collector makes payment of compensation to the persons interested - The learned Additional District Judge erred in rejecting the reference on the ground of limitation - Held that the order rejecting registration of reference is set aside and the matter is remitted to the learned Additional District Judge for fresh consideration (Paras 5-7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Additional District Judge was justified in rejecting the registration of a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground of limitation, and whether Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to such a reference.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the impugned order dated 02.02.2012, and remitted the matter to the learned Additional District Judge for fresh consideration. The learned Additional District Judge was directed to register the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and decide the same on merits in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Reference under Section 30 of Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 is not an application under the Limitation Act
- 1963
- Article 137 does not apply
- limitation for reference is governed by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894
- reference can be made at any time before the Collector makes payment of compensation to the persons interested
Case Details
2013 LawText (BOM) (08) 140
WRIT PETITION NO. 620 OF 2012
Mr. D. Shirodkar for petitioner, Mr. P. Dangui for respondent no.1
1. Special Land Acquisition Officer, Government of Goa, Water Resources Department, Gogal, Margao Goa. 2. Communidade of Raia, through its Attorney, having office at Raia, Salcete Goa.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging rejection of registration of a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 by the Additional District Judge.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought setting aside of the order dated 02.02.2012 and direction to register the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Filing Reason
The learned Additional District Judge refused to register the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground of limitation, returning it to the Land Acquisition Officer.
Previous Decisions
The Land Acquisition Officer made a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 to the District Judge. The learned Additional District Judge by order dated 02.02.2012 refused to register the reference and returned it to the Land Acquisition Officer.
Issues
Whether the learned Additional District Judge was justified in rejecting the registration of a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the ground of limitation?
Whether Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Submissions/Arguments
Mr. D. Shirodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not an application under the Limitation Act, 1963 and Article 137 does not apply. He argued that the limitation for such reference is governed by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which provides that the reference can be made at any time before the Collector makes payment of compensation to the persons interested.
Mr. P. Dangui, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent no.1, supported the impugned order.
Ratio Decidendi
A reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not an application under the Limitation Act, 1963, and Article 137 does not apply. The limitation for such a reference is governed by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, which provides that the reference can be made at any time before the Collector makes payment of compensation to the persons interested. Therefore, the learned Additional District Judge erred in rejecting the reference on the ground of limitation.
Judgment Excerpts
The above petition challenges an order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, South Goa, Margao dated 02.02.2012 whereby the registration of the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 made by the Land Acquisition Officer came to be rejected.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 is not an application under the Limitation Act, 1963 and Article 137 does not apply.
In my view, the learned Additional District Judge was not justified in rejecting the registration of the reference on the ground of limitation.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed a reference under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 before the Land Acquisition Officer on 12.10.2011. The Land Acquisition Officer made a reference to the District Judge. The learned Additional District Judge, by order dated 02.02.2012, refused to register the reference and returned it to the Land Acquisition Officer. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition before the High Court of Bombay at Goa.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 30, Section 18
- Limitation Act, 1963: Article 137
