Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY vs SENIOR C

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY VS SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, (REFEREE COURT), LODHRAN Ss.12(2) & 18---Reference, filing of---Situations where notice is served or not served upon interested persons---Limitation as per classification---Scope---Validity---Section 12(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (' the Act 1894') stipulates issuance of notice upon persons interested; and S.18(2) of the Act 1894 thereof prescribes the limitation for making application for reference and also contemplates the situation where no notice at all has been served---Proviso (b) to S. 18 of the Act 1894 covers both situations, i.e. where a notice has been served and where no notice has been served---In fact, the Legislature while drafting the Act 1894 made a conscious effort to remove hindrance from a person who has not been given a notice by giving him an extra-ordinary period of six months for making application for reference---Under S.18 (2)(b) of the Act 1894 , the limitation begins to run as soon as the award is made---In case where a notice has been served, the limitation expires after six weeks of the date of service and in case where the notice has not been served, it comes to an end after six months---Words "shall first expire" as occurring in clause (b) of S.18 of the Act 1894 leaves no room for doubt that the period of six months is the utmost time within which an application for reference can be made by a person dissatisfied with the award---Section 18(3) of the Act 1894 stipulates limitation of six months for the Government---Thus, the Act 1894 has prescribed three different periods of limitation; six weeks limitation from the date of award if the applicant was present either personally or through recognized agent at the time when the award was made---In case the applicant was not present, either personally or through his agent, then a six weeks time from the date of the notice received under S. 12(2) of the Act 1894; or, if no notice was served then six months from the date of award. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY VS SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, (REFEREE COURT), LODHRAN Ss.3 (b) & 18(3)---Reference, filing of---Reference filed by the acquirer (National Highways Authority)---Maintainability---Record revealed that although the reference-in-question was addressed to the Land Acquisition Collector, but the same was directly filed before the Referee Court---Subsection (3) of the S.18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (' the Act 1894') was amended by Land Acquisition (6th Amendment) Ordinance (VI of 1992), whereby for the words "Provincial Government", the words "Federal Government", "Provincial Government" a "Company" or "Local Authority" had been substituted---Thus, under S. 18(3) of the Act 1894, the appellant (National Highway Authority) having been constituted by the Federal Government , could file a reference---Sections 18 and 3(b) of the Act 1894 conjunctively stipulated that any "interested person" other than Government, not accepting the award, by written application to the Collector could require that the matter be referred by the Collector for the determination of the Court, however, if the award was not acknowledged by the Government (Provincial or Federal), Company or Local Authority constituted under the Government, in such eventuality the Reference could be made directly , without the agency of the Land Acquisition Collector under subsection (3) of S.18 of the Act 1894. Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY VS SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, (REFEREE COURT), LODHRAN S. 18---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O. VII, R.11---Reference, filing of---Limitation---Referee Court, powers of---Instead of the landowners, the acquirer (National Highways Authority) challenged the award by filing reference but after twelve years of passing the award---Respondents / landowners moved the Referee Court with an application under O. VII, R. 11 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 on the point of limitation---Referee Court dismissed the reference as barred by limitation---Contention of the appellant was that the Referee Court was not competent to determine the question of limitation---Validity---Reference was filed by the appellant (National Highway Authority), being a Authority constituted under the Federal Government, directly in the Court under the mandate of S.18(3) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which provided a maximum period of six months to call into question an award---Referee Court was competent to look into question of limitation on the Reference filed by the appellant---Appellant brought the reference with a considerable delay of almost twelve (12) years---No plausible explanation was available on record to suggest that the appellant remained ignorant of the award for such a long period---No illegality or irregularity was noticed in impugned judgment and decree passed by the Referee/Trial Court dismissing the Reference filed by the appellant (National Highway Authority) as barred by time---Regular first appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

Citation Name: 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY vs SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE, (REFEREE COURT), LODHRAN Ss — 2023 CLC 1798 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 CLC