DARBARI LAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The predecessor-in-interest of petitioners Nos. 1 and 2 was their father Kidar Nath. The land of Kidar Nath and Satpal Singh, Petitioner No. 3, was acquired way-back in the year 1970 under the provisions of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (for short, the Act). The Special Land Acquisition Collector, Pathankot, released compensation to both on 11.5.1971. Both these persons sent their respective applications on 16.5.1971 to the Special Land Acquisition Collector, Pathankot, disagreeing with the rate of compensation and obviously asking for an Arbitrator to be appointed to determine the right compensation. The application of Kidar Nath was received by the Special Land Acquisition Collector on 1.6.1971 and of Satpal Singh on 31.5.1971. Both these persons were communicated letters Annexures R-2 and R.3 bearing the date 15.11.1972, intimating to them that the respective application was time bared, for it should have been filed within 15 days of the receipt of payment/communication of rates. The petitioners claim that no such communication was received by them and rather they have been waiting and clamouring to the respondents to have the matter referred to arbitration under the provisions of the Act. It is in these circumstances that the petitioners are in this Court seeking a mandamus. Such claim of the petitioners which has been turned as belated by the respondents is refuted on the ground of delay and on account of the time bar.

(2.) The principles and methods of determining compensation are provided in section 8 of the Act. It provides, inter alia, as follows:-