Research › Browse › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

1905 DIGILAW 161 (ALL)

Shiva Sundari Dasi v. Collector of Cawnpore

1905-07-18

BANERJI, RICHARDS

body1905
JUDGMENT : Banerji, J. This is an application for revision under the following circumstances:— It appears that certain proceedings were taken under the Land Acquisition Act No. 1 of 1894, and an award was made by the Collector under the provisions of section 11 of the Act. One of the persons interested in the award and whose land was about to be compulsorily taken, was the applicant here, an application in writing was forwarded by her to the Collector as required by section 18 of the Act objecting to the award and calling for a reference. It is admitted that this application reached the Collector on the 1st of June, 1903, which was within the prescribed time. The application, however, instead of being presented to the Collector in person or by a pleader or other agent, was sent by post. The Collector having received the application and being satisfied in every respect, except as to whether or not it ought to have been sent by post, made the reference. 2. We of course assume that he was satisfied that the application was in fact made by or on behalf of the applicant. It is quite clear that an application of the kind was not unexpected, for the applicant had received the compensation awarded to her under protest. The learned Judge on receipt of the reference declined to bear the case solely on the ground that the application reached the Collector by post. It appears to us that in so declining to act he failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested, in him by law. The Collector had received a written application and acted upon it, and made the reference, it was then the duty of the Judge to proceed with the reference. Of course, the Collector in every case must satisfy himself before he makes the reference that a genuine application for a reference is made by a party interested. He might have refused to take action upon an application sent to him by post, if he had doubts about its genuineness, but in this case, as we have already pointed out, the Collector received the application, and was satisfied that it was a genuine application by the applicant. We accordingly allow this application, set aside the order of the Judge, and send the case back to him with directions to proceed with the reference in manner prescribed by law. We accordingly allow this application, set aside the order of the Judge, and send the case back to him with directions to proceed with the reference in manner prescribed by law. We make no order as to costs.