SRIMATHI CHERIATHOPPILAKATH KUNHIBI Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER KOZHIKODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a petition for a writ of certioraii to quash. Ext. A, an order passed by the respondent, the Land Acquisition Officer, Kozhikode, by which he held, that the petition before him under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to make a reference, was barred by limitation, and for a writ of mandamus to compel him to make, such reference. In A. S. No. 836 of 1959, when this matter came up on a prior occasion before a Division Bench of this Court, the respondent was directed ''to decide afresh the request for a reference of the award to the Court, after giving the appellant (petitioner) a fair opportunity of showing that the notice was not served on her". It was common ground that if the service of notice under section 12 (2) was valid and true, then the petition for reference was out of time. It has now been found in Ext. A, that

(2.) BUT the question now arises whether such service is valid and legal. It may at once be stat-ed that though the petitioner is referred to in the above finding as a ghosha lady, the respondent has also found that notice was served. On the husband in the presence of the petitioner. This was the testimony of the process server; winch the respondent has accepted for entering the above finding. The above reference to the petitioner as a Ghosha lady, does not import, that it was not practicable to serve the notice on the petitioner when she was herself present at the time of Service. In fact, the process server's evidence does mot lead to any such inference. The respondent has summarised the evident in these terms :

(3.) AS a result, Ext. A has to be quashed and mandamus has to issue to the respondent to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. This petition is ordered accordingly, but without costs.