UNION OF INDIA Vs. SAGWA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By his order dated October, 10, 1969, the Additional District Judge, Delhi, while dealing with an application under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on behalf of 16 claimants has decided apreliminary issue as to whether Kanhiya (respondent No. 14 herein), who was one of the 16 claimants, had' received payment without protest on the facts admitted by the parties. He decided the issue against the petitioners and held that Kanhiya was entitled to join in the said application.

(2.) The facts are that lands belonging to the respondents were acquired and the Collector made an award whereunder Kanhiya, respondent No. 14 , had also to receive the compensation offered by the Collector. On December 12, 1962, Kanhiya made an application to the Collector to the effect that he would receive the payment as offered by the Collector but under protest. However, when Kanhiya actually received payment on January 22, 1963, he did not mention his protest on the receipt given by him at that time. It was, therefore, contended on behalf of the petitioners that Kanhiya was not entitled to be a party to the application under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancement of compensation which had been forwarded to the Additional District Judge for disposal.

(3.) It cannot be disputed that the award of the Collector tentamounts to an offer of payment. Offers, ordinarily made, may either be accepted in which case a contract comes into existence or rejected in which case no contract comes into existence. A special provision has, however, been made in section 31 of the said Act with regard to payment of amounts awarded by the Collector. Sub-section (1) of section 31 of the said Act requires the Collector to tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested or entitled thereto according to the award. This is the offer by the Collector. It is open to the person to whom the offer is made not to consent to receive it in which case and by virtue of sub-section (2) of section 31, the Collector is to deposit the amount of compensation in the Court to which a reference under section 18 would be submitted. However, a departure is made from the ordinary law of contract by the first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 31 of the said Act. This proviso entitles any person to whom such tender of payment is made to receive the payment under protest as to the sufficiency of the amount. Notwithstanding the receipt of the amount tendered by the Collector under protest, the person to whom the amount is tendered remains entitled to ask for a referenc under section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to the Court. However, the second proviso to sub-section (2) of section 31 of the said Act creates a bar in the way of a person to whom such payment is tendered and who receives it otherwise than under protest in making an application under section 18 of the said Act. This second proviso is in these terms :-