TOTA RAMversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

A                                   TOTA RAM
                                          v.
                            STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

                                    JULY 9, 1997

B                [K. RAMASWAMY AND D.P. WADHWA, JJ.]

          Land Acquisition Act; 1894 :.

         S.28-A-Application u11de1~Limitation---Held, application is to be
C made within three months from the date of award of compensation by
  reference court-'-Time take11 in obtai11i11g certified copy of the award ;s to be
  excluded i11 computing the period of three months-The plea that limitation
  of three months begins to s(alt from the date of tire knowledge of the award
  is unsustainable. ·

D        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (C)
    No. 11171of1997.  .
         From the Judgment and Order dated 19. 11.96 of the Allahabad High
    Court in W.P. No. 12843 of 1994.

E         R.C. Srivastava, Ms. Rachna Srivastava and Ms. Rani Chhabra for
    the Petitioner.

           The following Order of the Court was delivered :

          This special leave petition arises from the judgment of the High
F    Court of Allahabad, made on November.19, 1996 in Writ Petition No.
     12843/94.

        Admittedly, on reference under Section 16 of the Land Acquisition
  Act, 1894 (for short, the "Act"), the ~eference Court passed its award and
  decree on May 18, 1990. The petitioner filed an application under Section
G 28~A of the Act on July 22, 1992 stating that ~e came to know on 19th July,
  1992 that in another reference compensation for the lands had been
  enhanced and claimed compensation at the said enhanced rates as he had
  filed application ~nder proviso to Section 28-A of the Act within three
  months of his knowledge. The Collector as well as the High Court have
H negatived the contention. The question that arises for consideration is
                                       184
                         TOTA RAM v. STATE                                185

whether the limitation for the purpose of application under Section 28-A         A
of the Act begins to start from the date of the knowledge. Section 28-A
reads as under :

        "28-A Re-determination of the amount of compensation on the
        basis of the award of the court - ( 1) Where in an award under this
        Part, the Court allows to the applicant any amount of compensa-          B
        tion in excess of the amount awarded by the Collector under
        Section 11, the persons interested in all the other land covered by
        the same uotification under Section 4 sub-section (1) and who are
        also aggrieved by the award of the Collector ipay notwithstanding
        that they _had not made an application to the Collector under            C
        Section 18, by written application tO the Collector within three
        months·from the date of the award of the Court require that the
        amount of compensation payable to them may be re-determined
        on the basis of the amount of compensation awarded by the
        Court:
                                                                                 D
        Provided that in computing the period of three months within art
        application to the Collector shall be made under this sub-section,
        the day on which the award was pronounced and the time requisite
        for obtaining a copy of the award shall be excluded.
                                                                  .              E
        (2) The Collector shall, on receipt of an application under sub-
        section (1) cqnduct an inquiry after giving notice to all the persons"
                                   a
        interested and giving them reasonabl~ opportunity of being heard
        and ·make an award determining the amount of compensation
        payable to the applicants.
                                                                                 F
         (3) Any person who has not accepted the award under sub-section
         (2) may, by written application to the Collector, require that the
         matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the
         Con.rt and the provisions of Section 18 to 28 shal~ so far as may
         be, apply to such reference as they apply to a reference under G
       . Section 18."

       A reading thereof dearly indicates that a person. whose land is
acquired under a common notification issued _under Section 4 (1) of the
Act but who failed to avail of the remedy of re.ference under Section 18,
is eligible to make a written application within three months from the date H
    186                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1997] SUPP. 2 S.C.R.

A of the award of the Court enhancing the compensation. It has been
    interpreted by this Court that the "court" means court of original civil
    jurisdiction to whom reference under Section 18 would lie. Admittedly, the
    award of the reference Court having been made on May 18, 1990, the
    limitation began to run from tha~ date. The proviSI) to Section 28-A gives
    a right to the persons to obtain the certified copy of the award and decree
B   and the time iaken for obtaining the certified copy of the award and .the
    decree shall be excluded in computing the period of three months. In view
    of the express language, the question of knowledge does not arise and,
    therefore, the plea of the petitioner that the limitation of three months
    begins to start from the date of the knowledge is clearly unsustainable and
C   cannot be accepted. The High Court, therefore, is right in its decision in
    that behalf.

           The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed.

    R.P.                                                     Petition dismissed.




                                                                                   c