Shahid Jamal vs State Of U.P.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.1349/2018 (ARISING FROM SLP (C) NO. 20203 OF 2012)

SHAHID JAMAL & ANR. APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

STATE OF U.P. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted.

2. The High Court, as per the impugned order,

declined to grant an order in favour of the

appellants for reference under Section 18 of the Land

Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “the Act”) for

enhancement of compensation, on the ground that the

application was filed beyond the period of six

months.

3. To refer to the undisputed facts, though the

Award was passed on 31.03.1999, the compensation was

paid only on 07.04.1999. There is no dispute that

the same was received under protest. According to

the appellants, the copy of the Award was not

Signature Not Verified supplied and, therefore, the appellants could not Digitally signed by

furnish the details of the objections with regard to NARENDRA PRASAD Date: 2018.02.03 12:36:40 IST Reason:

the Award in the application for reference.

1 4. Be that as it may, it is not in dispute that the

appellants had filed an application for reference on

24.07.1999. To the extent relevant, the request

reads as follows:-

“Kindly refer our case in the joint name of Shahid Jamal & Durwesh to reference court u/s. 18. Also please refer the case Shahid Jamal & M.A. Trading Co. and another in the name of Durwesh Najaf & MAT FAB International to reference court u/s. 18 and deposit the award amount u/s 31 sub section (2) part V.”

5. It seems that there was a communication dated

25.09.1999 from the Land Acquisition Officer to the

appellants. The letter reads as follows:-

“Please accept the reference of your letter dated 07.06.1999, 24.07.1999 and 25.08.1999, under which it has been mentioned that for the construction of the project of Ahmadpur Phulwaria Phase-1 of Bhadohi Industrial Development Authority the information of the declared Award regarding the acquired land from the village Lakhanpur alias Abhayanpur has not been made available.

Regarding this you have been informed that notice under section 12(2) was sent on 31.03.1999 regarding declaring the Award, on which you refused to sign. You demanded the copy of the Award at the time of receiving the amount of compensation on 07.04.1999 and even the photo copy of the Award was made available to you, but on the receiving register you did not sign, rather by making

2 unnecessary correspondence the certified copy of the Award is being demanded. From your said act it seems that you are trying to take advantage of the time limit (time barred) by hook or by crook after enclosing with your application the judicial precedents of the Hon'ble Courts, which is improper. Even then according to your desire the so-called photo copy of the Award is sent after enclosing.”

6. It may be specifically noted that the said letter

dated 25.09.1999 is, in any case, within six months’

period, as required under Section 18(2) of the Act

(as amended in the State of U.P.).

7. Learned senior counsel appearing for the State

points out that a proper application stating the

grounds for reference has been made only on

30.12.1999, which is beyond the prescribed period of

six months. It is submitted that under Section

18(2), the application for reference should contain

the grounds for reference and, therefore, only an

application with the grounds can be taken as a proper

application for reference.

8. In the impugned judgment the High Court has taken

note of the fact that the appellants had come to know

about the Award on 07.04.1999 when the compensation

was received and hence, the application dated

30.12.1999 under Section 18 of the Act was beyond

time and thus the writ petition was dismissed.

3

9. Having regard to the factual matrix we have

referred to above, and having heard the learned

senior counsel appearing for the appellants as well

as the learned senior counsel appearing for the

State, we find that the High Court has unfortunately

missed a crucial point on facts. As can be seen from

the extracted portion of the application dated

24.07.1999 there is a specific request for reference

under Section 18 of the Act. It is not in dispute

and it is borne out from the records also as seen by

the High Court the compensation was received only

under protest with regard to the sufficiency of the

compensation. It is also seen from the communication

from the Land Acquisition Officer to the appellants

dated 25.09.1999, on which date the time under

Section 18 had not expired, that certified copy of

the Award had not been furnished to the appellants.

However, a photocopy of the Award was given, which

the appellants were not inclined to acknowledge.

10. Having regard to the fact that the appellants had

accepted the compensation under protest on the point

of sufficiency of the compensation and having made a

specific request for reference under Section 18 on

24.07.1999, which indisputably is within six months,

we are of the view that this is a case where the

request under Section 18 of the Act made on

24.07.1999 should be treated as a proper application.

4 It may also have to be seen that before rejection the

grounds had also been furnished after receipt of the

certified copy of the Award. Ordered accordingly.

11. However, having regard to the peculiar facts and

circumstances of this case, we are of the view that

we should also invoke our jurisdiction under Article

142 of the Constitution of India and pass certain

further orders for doing complete justice between the

parties regarding the interest from 07.04.1999, the

date when the appellants received the compensation,

till the filing of this special leave petition on

29.06.2012 in the interest of any enhancement.

Accordingly, for the said period, in the event of any

enhancement, the appellants shall not be entitled to

any interest.

12. The appeal is disposed of, as above.

13. Needless to say that this order is confined only

to the statutory benefit of interest and all other

benefits, which the appellants are free to claim when

the reference under Section 18 of the Act is

considered on merits. We also direct the Land

Acquisition Collector to make a reference within four

weeks from today and the Reference Court shall

dispose of the same within three months thereafter.

The parties are free to take all available

contentions before the Reference Court.

5

14. Pending applications, if any, shall stand

disposed of.

15. There shall be no orders as to costs.

.........................J. [KURIAN JOSEPH]

.........................J. [MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR] NEW DELHI;

JANUARY 30, 2018

6