Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 212 (JK)

Union of India v. Math Rain and anr.

2013-04-16

MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN ATTAR

body2013
The judgment dated 30.07.2011 of learned District Judge, Kishtwar passed on a Reference under Section 18 of the State Land Acquisition Act is called in question in this Civil Appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant restricted his challenge to the judgment only to the extent of Reference being time barred. Learned counsel submitted that respondent No.1 in his application filed through his counsel seeking reference under Section 18 of the State Land Acquisition Act has stated in paragraph No.4 here of that for the first time he knew about the acquisition of his house and land in third week of December, 2002 through Patwari Halqa, who informed him about the acquisition proceeding and compensation for the house and land. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the admission made by the respondent in paragraph No.4 of the application, application elated 02.07.2003 seeking reference was beyond the period of six months and was liable to be dismissed. Learned counsel in support of his contention referred to the judgment of this Court in case titled State though Collector Land Acquisition, Rajouri vs. Probed) Chancier and others reported in 2003(2)JKJ 554 [HC], Learned counsel accordingly, prayed that appeal be allowed and the impugned judgment be set aside. Learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that the respondent got knowledge about passing of the Award on 16.06.2003 when he received the compensation amount along with Jabrana vide cheque No.7607866 dated 16.06.2003 under protest and filed application before the Collector on 02.07.2003 for making reference to the Civil Court. Learned counsel submitted that in view of the mandate contained in Section 18(2) of the State Land Acquisition Act, reference was, thus, within time. Paragraph No.4 of the application on which whole hog reliance is placed by learned counsel for the appellant would show that the respondent learnt about the acquisition proceedings and compensation from patwari concerned in third week of December 2002. Perusal of the said paragraph would show that the patwari Halqa had only informed the respondent about acquisition proceedings and compensation and had not informed him that award has been published by the Collector. Perusal of the said paragraph would show that the patwari Halqa had only informed the respondent about acquisition proceedings and compensation and had not informed him that award has been published by the Collector. Reading of the paragraph No.4 of the Application would show and suggest that the respondent got knowledge of the acquisition proceedings and compensation to be paid to him and not of the publishing of the award as it is not stated in the said paragraph that Patwari told him about publishing of the award by the Collector. This information having not been given to the respondent by the patwari Malqa. claim of the learned counsel for the appellant that the date of knowledge of the publishing of the award was third week of December 2002" cannot be accepted. Furthermore, when admittedly no evidence in rebuttal has been led by the appellant to controvert the claim of the respondent that he got knowledge about publishing of award on 16.06.2003, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the reference Court. In the facts of this case, the application seeking reference to civil court has been filed within time prescribed under Section 18(2) of State Land Acquisition Act. Judgment in case of Probodh Chander and others, upon which reliance has been placed by learned counsel for the appellant, also does not support the appellant, inasmuch as, it has been stated in paragraph No.6 of the judgment that receiving knowledge about acquisition would not constitute either actual or constructive notice of the making of the award. Tis judgment infact helps the case of the respondent. This Appeal along with connected application (s) is, therefore, dismissed. The amount deposited with the Registry of the Court along with interest shall be released in favour of the respondent No.1 claimant in accordance with the judgment of learned District Judge, Kishtwar and on his proper identification.