STATE OF MIZORAMversusBIAKCHHAWNA

                         STATE OF MIZORAM                                       A
                                     v.
                            BIAKCHHAWNA

                            OCTOBER 7, 1994

         [K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.)                                B

      Land Acquisition Act, 189*-Sections 18, 19, 20 and 31.

      Civil Procedure Code, 1908-Section <>--Jurisdiction of Civil
Court-Objection for higher compensatio!t-Mandatory compliance of Sec-
tions 18 to 20 is sin quo non for Court to proceed thereupon.
                                                                                c
      The Notification u/s 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was
published, acquiring the land in District Aizawl. The respondent filed
objection which were overruled. The collector made his award. The respon·
dent recived the compensation nnder protest and filed an application bnt        D
no reference to Civil Court was made u/s 18 of the Act.

      The respondent filed the Civil suit and a decree was passed. The
appellant challenged the jurisdiction and validity of the judgement and
decree. The High Court dismissed the appeal. This appeal has been filed
against the judgement of the High Court.                                        E
      Allowing the appeal, this Court

       HELD : 1. The scheme of the Land Acquisition Act, envisages that
on making an application u/s 18, making a reference u/s 18 of the Act in
the manner prescribed u/s 19, it is mandatory and sine quo non for the          F
Court to proceed 'thereupon' since it gets jurisdiction to issue a notice to
the persons specifying. the date to appear before them. Since this is a
special procedure provided in the Act, by necessary implication, the Civil
Court u/s 9 of the Civil Procedure Code has been prohibited to take
cognizance of the objections arising under the Act for determination or the     G
compensation for the land acquired under the Act. A valid order or
referene u/s 18 Is sine quo non for a Civil Court or original jurisdiction or
special judicial officer specially appointed to take cognizance or the objec-
tion. [425-D, F, 424-F]

      2. At the time of disposing of the award proceeding, the Land             H
                                 421
    422                      SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A Acquisition Collector or the Court on reference u/s 18 of the Act are
    required by statutory commendations to follow the substance of the
    provisions of the Land Acquisition Act as contained in para 3 of the
    Notification issued by the Governor on 13th Aug., 1987. It is seen that the
    procedure prescribed in para 3 of the Notiliation is not in derogation of
    the mandatory compliance u/ss. 18 to 20, and Civil Conrt does not get valid
B
    and legal ju¥isdiction to take cognizance of the objection for higher com-
    pensation unless the procedure prescribed in sections 18, 19, 20 and 31 are
    complied with and adhered to. [425-G-H, 426-A]

          3. The High Court and Civil Court committed a clear and manifest
c   error of law in decreeing the suit. The impugned judgments and decrees
    are set aside as being nullity. [426-B]

            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 7430 of
    1994.

D        From the Judgment and Order dated 15.6.93 of the Gauhati High
    Court in F.A. No.l of 1991.

            K. Lahiri and Mrs. H. Wahi for the Appellant.

            K.K. Venugopal and R. Sathish for the Respondent.
E
            The following order of the Court was delivered :

            Leave granted.

          The notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act,
F   1894 (for short 'the Act') was published in the Gazette by the State of
    Mizoram on 13th August, 1987 acquiring the land in District Aizawl for
    providing accommodation to the Assam Rifles. The respondent filed ob-
    jections and ultimately the objections were overruled. The Collector made
    his Award No. 4/1988 on 26th August, 1988. The respondent was entitled
G   the compensation of Rs. 5,34,748. The respondent received the compensa-
    tion under protest and on 29th September, 1988, filed an application but
    ultimately the Collector did not make any reference to the Civil Court
    under Section 18 of the Act.

            The respondent filed the Civil Suit No. 2/1989 in the Court of Deputy
H Commissioner, Aizawl which endorsed for disposal to the Additional Dis-
               STATE OF MIZORAM v. BIAKCHHAWNA                          423
trict Magistrate. After the receipt of the notice the appellant objected to A
the jurisdiction of the Civil Court in entertaining the suit. The Additional
District Magistrate in his Judgment overruled the objection and granted
the decree declaring that "the respondent is entitled to a sum of Rs.
26,39,286 as compensation for compulsory acquisition of his lands
described in the suit and shall get the decree to that effect". The appellant B
had challenged the jurisdiction and validity of the Judgment and Decree
in the High Court. By the impugned Judgment in First Appeal No. 1 of
1991 dated 15.6.1993, the High Court of Guwahati dismissed the appeal.

       It is contended for the appellant that under scheme of the Act when
the claimant received the compensation under protest, he should specifi-       C
cally seek reference under Section 18 of the Act. Since he did not seek the
reference, the Collector was not under any obligation to make a reference
under Section 18 of the Act. Instead of filing a Writ Petition under Article
226 directing the Collector to refer the dispute, the respondent had chosen
to file the Civil Suit which the Civil Court had no jurisdiction to take       D
cognizance and grant a decree as confirmed by the Appellate Court.

      It is contended by Mr. K.K. Venugopal, the learned Senior Advocate
for the respondent that what the Court has to see is the substance of the
matter. It is argued that the Governor had issued the Notification adopting
the Assam Autonomous Districts (Land Acquisition) Regulation, 1951             p
under sub-section 3 of Section 2. Sub-section 3 of Section 2 qf the said
Regulation syas :

        'Any court or authority may construe the provisions of the Land
        Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act No. 1 of 1894) and of any rules and
        orders made thereunder with such modifications not affecting           F
        substance as may be necessary or proper to adopt them to the
        matter before that court or authority."

       The Deputy Commissioner gave a hearing to the respondent and
after having been satisfied, referred the matter to the Civil Court of         G
Additional District Magistrate to dispose of the suit. In substance the suit
is a reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Court had thereby juris-
diction to grant the decree as was given in the impugned judgment. We
find no force in the contentions.

      It is true that in the State of Mizoram, the Dist. Magistrate and the    H
    424                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A   Addi. Dist. Magistrate have the juridiction both on executive side and the
    civil side. But the one cannot be fused for the other. When the statute
    indicated that the action be taken was to be in a particular manner. It must
    be doen in that manner and in no other way. Under Section 11 of the Act
    the Collector after making an Award is enjoined to tender payment after
    giving notice of making the award and on receiving the notice any inter-
B
    ested person present at the time of making the award or on receipt of the
    notice, is not only entitled to receive the compensation under Sections 18
    & 31 of the Act under protest but also is entitled to make an application
    in writing requiring the Collector to refer the matter and the Collector is
    enjoined under Section 18 of the Act to make a reference of the objection
C   made by the claimant as an interested person, objecting to either (a) the
    measurement of the land, (b) for the amount of compensation, or (c) the
    person to whom it is payable or the compensation among the interested
    person. The application should be made within the prescribed period
    mentioned in sub-section 2 of Section 18 of the Act. The Collector acts as
D   an agent of the Govt. under s.11 and while making a reference under s.18,
    he acts as a statutory authority exercising his own power under s. 18.
    Making an application within limitation in writing is sine quo non for
    making a valid reference. The court is a special tribunal under the Act
    having special jurisdiction and has power and duty to see that the reference
    made under s.18 is in compliance with the conditions laid down therein so
E   as to give to court the jurisdiction to hear the reference. The court under
    s.3( d) is not only the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction but also
    a special judicial officer specially appointed by the Govt. A valid order of
    reference u/s.18 is sine qua non for a civil court of original jurisdiction or
    special judicial officer specially appointed to take cognizance of the objec-
F    lion. Though an application was made within six weeks as seen herein-
    before, no reference under s.18 was made by the Collector. The Collector
     is enjoin.ed, while making a reference, to make a statement "in writing under
    his land" under Section 19 of the Act, with particulars enumerated therein.
     The Collector has to state, to the Court all the information on:- (a) the
     situtation and extent of the land, with particulars of any trees, building or
G    standing crops thereon; (b) the names of the persons whom he has reason
     to think interested in such land; (c) the amount awarded for damages and
     paid or tendered under Sections 5 and 17, or either of them, and the
     amount of compensation awarded under Section 11; (cc) the amount paid
     or deposited under sub-section (3A) of Section 17 and (d) if the objection
H
                STA1EOFMIZORAMv. BIAKCHHAWNA                            425

be to the amount of the compensation, the grounds on which the amount A
of compensation was determined. He should append the schedule giving
particulars in that behalf as enumerated in sub-section 2 of Section 19 of
the Act. On receipt of such a valid reference with the statement, the Court
shall under Section 20 "thereupon" cause a notice specifying the day on
which the Court will proceed to determine the objection, and directing
                                                                            B
their appearance before the Court on that day, to be served on the
following persons, namely:

      (a) the applicant;

      (b) all persons interested in the objection, except snch (if any) of     C
them as have consented without protest to receive payment of the compen-
sation awarded; and

    (c) if the objection is in regard to the area of the land or to the
amount of the compensation, the Collector.
                                                                               D
      Thus, the scheme of the Act envisages that on making an application
under s.18, making a reference under Section 18 of the Act in the manner
prescribed under Section 19 the Court is mandatory and is sine quo non
for the couft to proceed 11 thereuponn since it gets jurisdiction to issue a
notice to the persons enumerated hereinbefore specifying the day to ap-
pear before them. The Court then is enjoined to determine compensation
                                                                               E
in the manner prescribed in part III of the Act. On such determination, it
shall pass a decree and the award under section 26 and in the form and
manner specified therein. The Award is a decree and the statement of
grounds a judgment under sub-section 2 of Section 26 of the Act for the
purpose of appeal under s.54. Since this is a special procedure provided in    F
the Act, by necessary implication, the Civil Court under Section 9 of the
Civil Procedure Code 1908 has been prohibited to take cognizance of the
objections arising under the Act for determination of the compensation for
the land acquired under the Act.

      Therefore, at the time ,of disposing of the award proceeding, the        G
Land Acquisition Collector or the Court on reference under Section 18 of
the Act are required by statutory commendations to follow the substance
of the provisions of the Land A'Cquisition Act as contained in para 3 of the
Notification issued by the Governor on 13th August, 1987. It is seen that
the procedure perescribed in para 3 of the ~otification is not in derogation   H
    426                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1994] SUPP. 4 S.C.R.

A of the mandatory compliance under ss. 18 to 20, and Civil Court does not
    get valid and legal jurisdiction to take cognizance of the objection for
    higher compensation unless the procedure prescribed in ss.18, 19, 20 and
    31 are ::omplied with and adhered to.

           The High Court and Civil Court committed a clear and manifest
B   error of law in decreeing the suit. The impugned Judgments and decrees
    are set aside as being a nullity. However the Collector is directed to make
    a reference to the Civil Court as the application with the requisite par-
    ticulars was filed in writing with the objections raised by the respondent
    on September 29, 1988. The Civil Court shall dispose of the matter as
C   expeditiously as possible. The appeal is allowed. No costs.

    A.G.                                                      Appeal allowed.