NON-REPORTABLE 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 supplied  and,  therefore,  the  appellants  could  not furnish the details of the objections with regard to 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