Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

9. But at the same time, it is submitted by Sri.Rajagopalan Nair that though this Court by a process of judicial interpretation has become inclined to treat Annexure-A as a valid request for reference under Section 18(2) it cannot be denied that due to the inadequacy in the language employed by the appellant in Annexure-A only, the learned Subordinate Judge became compelled to answer the reference in the negative. Therefore, the Government and the Requisitioning Authority should not be mulcted with  the heavy interest liability which is arising on account of the delay between the date of the judgment of the Reference Court and this date, so argued the learned counsel. According to him, the appellant should not be paid the interest otherwise admissible under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act on the re-determined compensation during the above period of four years from 07/10/05 till 05/08/09. We find some force in the above submission. It is clear from Annexure-A that the appellant is not a fully literate person and it appears to us that he was seeking advice from somebody else in the matter of drafting Annexure-A. Despite the advice, Annexure-A is a poorly drafted document and therefore, we are of the view that the Government and the Requisitioning Authority cannot be mulcted with the interest liability for the whole period between 07/10/05 till 05/08/09. According to us, the appellant need be given the benefit of this judgment only subject to the following two conditions:-