2005 (10) TMI 586 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Scope and effect of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended in Karnataka.
2. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to applications under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act.
3. The competence of the Deputy Commissioner to make a reference after the expiry of the prescribed period.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Scope and Effect of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act as Amended in Karnataka:
The appeals revolve around the interpretation of Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended in Karnataka. Section 18(2) mandates that a claimant must apply for a reference within 90 days from the date of service of notice under Section 12(2). Sub-section (3) directs the Deputy Commissioner to make the reference within 90 days of receiving the application. If the Deputy Commissioner fails to do so, the claimant can apply to the court under Section 18(3)(b) to compel the reference. The court held that the claimant must approach the court within three years of the expiry of 90 days from the date of the application for reference, as per Article 137 of the Limitation Act.

2. Applicability of Section 5 of the Limitation Act to Applications under Section 18(3)(b):
The court clarified that Section 5 of the Limitation Act, which allows for condonation of delay, does not apply to applications under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act. The court emphasized that the Land Acquisition Act is a special statute, and the specific time limits prescribed therein must be strictly adhered to. The court cited its previous rulings, including Officer on Special Duty (Land Acquisition) and Anr. v. Shah Manilal Chandulal and Ors., to support this view.

3. Competence of the Deputy Commissioner to Make a Reference After the Expiry of the Prescribed Period:
The court held that both the claimant's right to move the court and the Deputy Commissioner's power to make a reference are extinguished after three years and 90 days from the date of the application for reference. The court rejected the view that the Deputy Commissioner could make a reference at any time, even after the claimant's right to seek a reference had expired. The court emphasized that allowing such a practice would defeat the purpose of the statutory scheme, which aims to prevent undue delays and ensure timely resolution of land acquisition matters.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court upheld the view that the right to seek a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended in Karnataka is extinguished if not exercised within the prescribed period. The court also ruled that Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to applications under Section 18(3)(b). Consequently, the Deputy Commissioner cannot make a reference after the expiry of three years and 90 days from the date of the application for reference. The appeals were allowed, and the orders of the High Court were set aside. The applications for reference made by the claimants were dismissed, and the respondents were held not entitled to claim any enhancement under Section 18 of the Act.