PHAGAN RAM Vs. STATE AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question for decision is whether in the facts and circumstances of this case the Petitioner can be said to have received payment under protest from the Collector.

(2.) The admitted facts are these. The land of the Petitioner was acquired for the purpose of Bias Dam Project. It was on 28 -6 -1971 that the award was announced. However, the Petitioner was not present at the time of the announcement of the award. It was on 28 -7 -1971 that the Petitioner filed an application under Sec. 18 of the Land Acquisition Act claiming a reference for determining the amount of compensation. Later on, the Petitioner received the compensation awarded to him by the Collector on 12 -8 -1971 The Collector refused to make the reference on the ground that the Petitioner had accepted the compensation without protest.

(3.) It is true that while accepting the compensation the Petitioner did not write that he was accepting the same under protest. However, the facts speak for themselves. The Petitioner's protest is evident from the fact that he had, before receiving the compensation, asked for reference under Sec. 18 for determination of the amount of compensation as be objected to the compensation awarded by the Collector. Having raised the objection before receiving the compensation, it was not necessary for the Petitioner to repeat his protest again at the time be received the compensation.