Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(iv) If a person interested receives a notice under Section 12(2) of the Act, after the expiry of six weeks from the date of receipt of such notice, he cannot claim the benefit of the provision for six months for making the application on the ground that the date of receipt of notice under Section 12(2) of the Act was the date of knowledge of the contents of the award."

On the basis of the materials on record it appears that Nikhil Chandra Chattopadhyay made an application on 7th September, 2002 to receive the awarded compensation in the L.A. case in question as the only legal heir taking the plea that he had no previous knowledge of the award as made earlier. The revenue officer seems to have allowed the said application for substitution and the payment of compensation was made on 18th March, 2008. Thereafter the petitioner submitted the reference petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 3rd April, 2008 on the plea that he got the knowledge of the award in question only after receipt of payment notice on 11th March, 2008. In deciding such matter, it has to be seen if the petitioner could have the actual or constructive knowledge of the award and in that event the law laid down in the case of Bhagwan Das(supra) would apply. The petitioner would be required to satisfy the reasons for making the application on 7th December, 2007 to receive the compensation in L.A. Case and why not earlier. If it is found from the materials on record and on evidence that the logical inference could be deduced from the said application for reference that he had the constructive knowledge of the award then the ratio of Bhagwan Das would apply squarely and in that case reference may fail. The mere inaction on the part of Gora priort to 1988 when the award was made by itself would not defeat the right of Nikhil to file lthe reference after receipt of the award. These are the matters which require fresh consideration.