Judgment : D. S. Sinha, J. 1. Heard Sri Nanhae Lal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, at length and in detail. 2. BY the impugned order dated 26th September, 1995, passed by the 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Senior Division), Ghaziabad in Original Suit No. 848 of 1995 between Sant Kumar and Durga Singh and another, the prayer of the plaintiff appellant that the defendant-respondents be restrained from receiving from the Special Land Acquisition Officer, Ghaziabad the sum of Rs. 6,54,000 payable to them under an award rendered in land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, (hereinafter called the Act), has been turned down. It is not in dispute that the money in question has been duly determined to be payable to the defendant-respondents by a valid award which has become final under Section 12 of the Act, and that no recourse to proceedings under Section 30 of the Act had been taken by the plaintiff-appellant. 3. SINCE the defendant-respondents are to receive the money under a valid award under the Act which has attained finality the plaintiff-appellant cannot prevent them from receiving it for so long as the award survives and is not annulled in appropriate proceedings, if maintainable in law. Thus, the prayer of the plaintiff-appellant for injuncting the defendant-respondents from receiving the money cannot be sustained. 4. DURING the course of the arguments the learned counsel for the appellant emphasised and canvassed at length that the suit giving rise to instant appeal is maintainable notwithstanding the fact that no recourse had been taken by the appellant under Section 30 of the Act. The court refrains from expressing any opinion on this point as neither it arises in this appeal nor is it necessary for disposal thereof. In the result, the appeal fails and is hereby dismissed summarily under Order XLI, Rule 11 read with Rule 2 of Order XLIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 5. SOON after dictation of the order the learned counsel for the plaintiff-appellant made an oral application for a certificate of the nature referred to in Clause (1) of Article 133 of the Constitution of India. But, he advanced no arguments to justify the prayer except emphasising the fact that the case had been argued by him at a considerable length. 6. THE court has anxiously examined the prayer for the certificate. But, he advanced no arguments to justify the prayer except emphasising the fact that the case had been argued by him at a considerable length. 6. THE court has anxiously examined the prayer for the certificate. In its opinion the case does not involve any such substantial question of law of general importance which needs to be decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. THE certificate prayed for is, therefore, refused. Appeal dismissed.