STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. MARRI VENKAIAH
LAWS(SC)-2003-7-22
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM: ANDHRA PRADESH)
Decided on
July 28,2003
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH
Appellant
VERSUS
MARRI VENKAIAH
Respondents
Referred Judgements :-
TOTA RAM V. STATE OF U.P AND OTHERS [REFERRED]RAJA HARISH CHANDRA RAJ SINGH SINGH VS. DEPUTY LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [REFERRED]
STATE OF PUNJAB VS. QAISAR JEHAN BEIGUN [REFERRED]
JOSE ANTONIO CRUZ DOS R RODRIGUESE COMMUNIDADE OF CAVELOSSIM VS. LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR:LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR [REFERRED]
UNION OF INDIA VS. MANGATU RAM [REFERRED]
Cited Judgements :-
STATE OF KERALA VS. CHIRAYIL VELAYUDHAN [LAWS(KER)-2003-10-31] [REFERRED TO]V.SUKUMARI VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-12-98] [REFERRED TO]
V.SUKUMARI VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2022-12-98] [REFERRED TO]
RAM BHUL VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2024-4-102] [REFERRED TO]
CHANDRA KISHORI VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2007-3-85] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-12-111] [REFERRED TO]
EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, JALNA MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, JALNA, DISTRICT JALNA UNDER GMIDC, AURANGABAD VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE AND FOREST DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI [LAWS(BOM)-2017-12-186] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF KERALA VS. MATHA [LAWS(KER)-2005-1-63] [RELIED ON]
SHRIKRISHNA SITARAMAJI FANDE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2007-10-172] [REFERRED TO]
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2017-12-68] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS. P NARAYANAN [LAWS(MAD)-2006-11-197] [REFERRED TO]
SAYEED ALAM VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2009-1-6] [RELIED ON]
BABU NANDAN VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2006-6-44] [REFERRED TO]
PRAHLADBHAI TRIKAMBHAI PATEL VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [LAWS(GJH)-2008-12-194] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H.P. VS. DEVI RAM [LAWS(HPH)-2007-4-51] [REFERRED TO]
PARADEEP PHOSPHATES LTD. VS. STATE OF ORISSA [LAWS(ORI)-2009-3-70] [REFERRED TO]
MATILAL BHOWMIK AND ORS. VS. THE UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. [LAWS(TRIP)-2015-7-42] [REFERRED TO]
Y.S.PARMAR UNIVERSITY VS. GRAM PANCHAYAT GADOGH [LAWS(HPH)-2009-10-54] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H.P. VS. SITA RAM [LAWS(HPH)-2007-4-47] [REFERRED TO]
BABU NANDAN VS. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [LAWS(ALL)-2006-2-230] [REFERRED TO]
TEJPAL SINGH AND 5 OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2019-3-151] [REFERRED TO]
POPAT BAHIRU GOVARDHANE VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER [LAWS(SC)-2013-8-49] [REFERRED TO]
PATIALA IMPROVEMENT TRUST THRU. ITS CHAIRMAN VS. S. AMAR SINGH [LAWS(P&H)-2005-2-71] [REFERRED TO]
KONKAN RAILWAY CORPORATION LIMITED VS. K GOPALKRISHNA PRABHU [LAWS(KAR)-2019-5-43] [REFERRED TO]
DISTRICT COLLECTOR VS. GUPTA GARMENTS [LAWS(MAD)-2019-4-293] [REFERRED TO]
ZAIREMTHANGA AND ANR. VS. STATE OF MIZORAM AND ORS. [LAWS(GAU)-2015-11-103] [REFERRED TO]
SHESHABAI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-8-580] [REFERRED TO]
SHESHABAI VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2023-8-580] [REFERRED TO]
UNICIPAL CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD VS. STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH [LAWS(APH)-2003-4-67] [REFERRED TO]
VISWARAO BHAURAO BHOITE VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2004-9-27] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ORISSA VS. CHITRASEN BHOI [LAWS(SC)-2009-9-37] [REFERRED TO]
SURENDRAKUMAR MADHUSUDAN MOR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2012-7-168] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF GOA VS. JOAQUIM ANTONIO FILOMENO JOSE [LAWS(BOM)-2011-8-65] [REFERRED TO]
VAJSIBHAI RAMABHAI SAGAR VS. STATE OF GUJARAT [LAWS(GJH)-2023-6-19] [REFERRED TO]
SATYAPAL SINGH AND 21 OTHERS VS. STATE OF U P AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-9-40] [REFERRED TO]
OIL AND NATURAL GAS CORPORATION LTD VS. SAMARENDRANATH MUKHERJEE [LAWS(TRIP)-2013-10-10] [REFERRED]
ABDUL RASHEED VS. STATE OF KERALA [LAWS(KER)-2004-10-34] [REFERRED TO]
GREATER NOIDA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY VS. SMT. RAJBALA AND 3 OTHERS [LAWS(ALL)-2017-8-207] [REFERRED TO]
KARAM CHAND VS. STATE OF H.P. [LAWS(HPH)-2014-5-68] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H.P. VS. PURAN DUTT [LAWS(HPH)-2007-4-48] [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF H.P. VS. GIAN CHAND [LAWS(HPH)-2007-4-49] [REFERRED TO]
PATEL RATILAL SHAMALDAS VS. SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER NARMADA CANAL PROJECT [LAWS(GJH)-2009-9-92] [REFERRED TO]
RANOJI RAO VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA [LAWS(KAR)-2006-1-11] [REFERRED TO]
TRICOLOR HOTELS LIMITED VS. DINESH JAIN [LAWS(DLH)-2022-11-252] [REFERRED TO]
SMT. KAMLA TOMAR VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2017-1-279] [REFERRED TO]
OM PRAKASH VS. STATE OF U.P. [LAWS(ALL)-2020-11-97] [REFERRED TO]
BALWAN SINGH VS. GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI [LAWS(DLH)-2025-2-16] [REFERRED TO]
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF HYDERABAD VS. STATE OF A P [LAWS(APH)-2004-4-12] [REFERRED TO]
D. MAHESH KUMAR VS. STATE OF TELANGANA [LAWS(APH)-2016-11-7] [REFERRED TO]
VISWASRAO BHAURAO BHOITE (CHAVAN) VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [LAWS(BOM)-2003-9-158] [REFERRED]
JUDGEMENT
M. B. Shah, J. -
(1.)Short question involved in these appeals is - whether the period of limitation for filing application under S. 28-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) begins to run from the date of passing of the Award by the Court in a reference filed by a landowner, other than the applicant, whose land was acquired by common notification under S. 4 of the Act or from the date of the knowledge by the applicant of passing of the award by the Civil Court
(2.)Admittedly, in the present case notification under S. 4(1) was issued on 16-5-1980 for acquiring land situated in Garedepalli village of Nalgonda District for formation of Command Area Development Ayacut Road under Nagarjunasagar Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 15-1-1982. Some of the landowners filed reference application in respect of lands covered by the Award and the Civil Court in O.P. No. 36 of 1984 by order dated 29th November, 1984 enhanced the amount of compensation. Thereafter, on the basis of the said award, respondents filed application under S. 28-A of the Act on 27th November, 1989 for enhancement of the compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer by order dated 28th January, 1990 dismissed the said application as barred by limitation under S. 28-A of the Act.
(3.)That order was challenged by filing writ petitions before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order dated 24th September, 1993 held that three months period prescribed under S. 28-A of the Act have to be computed from the date of the knowledge of the passing of the award and not from the date of the award by Civil Court and thereby directed the appellants to entertain the applications filed by the respondents under S. 28-A of the Act and to deal with them in accordance with law. The High Court further recommended to the Government to bring suitable amendment in the Land Acquisition Act authorising the Land Acquisition Officer or the Collector to send intimation in relation to passing of the award by the Civil Court to the persons interested, who had not sought reference under S. 18 of the Act, to make them know about the said award.
(2.)Admittedly, in the present case notification under S. 4(1) was issued on 16-5-1980 for acquiring land situated in Garedepalli village of Nalgonda District for formation of Command Area Development Ayacut Road under Nagarjunasagar Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award on 15-1-1982. Some of the landowners filed reference application in respect of lands covered by the Award and the Civil Court in O.P. No. 36 of 1984 by order dated 29th November, 1984 enhanced the amount of compensation. Thereafter, on the basis of the said award, respondents filed application under S. 28-A of the Act on 27th November, 1989 for enhancement of the compensation. The Land Acquisition Officer by order dated 28th January, 1990 dismissed the said application as barred by limitation under S. 28-A of the Act.
(3.)That order was challenged by filing writ petitions before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh. The Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment and order dated 24th September, 1993 held that three months period prescribed under S. 28-A of the Act have to be computed from the date of the knowledge of the passing of the award and not from the date of the award by Civil Court and thereby directed the appellants to entertain the applications filed by the respondents under S. 28-A of the Act and to deal with them in accordance with law. The High Court further recommended to the Government to bring suitable amendment in the Land Acquisition Act authorising the Land Acquisition Officer or the Collector to send intimation in relation to passing of the award by the Civil Court to the persons interested, who had not sought reference under S. 18 of the Act, to make them know about the said award.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.