JOSE ANTONIO CRUZ DOS R. RODRIGUESES AND ANR. ETC. versus LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANR.

JOSE ANTONIO CRUZ DOS R. RODRIGUESES AND ANR. ETC. versus LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR AND ANR.

The interpretation of Section 28-A regarding the commencement of the three months’ limitation, whether from the first award or from each subsequent award/judgment, and its applicability, raises substantial questions requiring consideration by a larger Bench of five Judges.

Parties
Petitioner: Jose Antonio Cruz Dos R. Rodrigues and Another; Respondent: Land Acquisition Collector and Another
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
13 November 1995
Procedural Posture
Special Leave Petition (civil) / Referred to Larger Bench
Outcome
Petition disposed of; referred to larger Bench for decision on stated questions.
Legal Topics
Limitation Period for Application Under Section 28 a, Redetermination of Compensation, Successive Awards and Commencement of Limitation
Land Acquisition Limitation Period for Application Under Section 28 a Redetermination of Compensation Successive Awards and Commencement of Limitation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jose Antonio Cruz Dos R. Rodrigues and Another

Petitioner

Land Acquisition Collector and Another

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Special Leave Petition (civil) / Referred to Larger Bench

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the award of the Civil Court under Section 26 on reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 includes the judgment and decree of the Appellate Court under Section 54.
  2. 2 Whether each successive award or judgment and decree gives rise to a separate cause of action to file an application under Section 28-A; and whether such a construction aligns with the language of Section 28-A.

Ratio Decidendi

The interpretation of Section 28-A regarding the commencement of the three months’ limitation, whether from the first award or from each subsequent award/judgment, and its applicability, raises substantial questions requiring consideration by a larger Bench of five Judges.

Court Disposition

Petition disposed of; referred to larger Bench for decision on stated questions.

Orders

  • Issue notice to the respondent returnable in four weeks.
  • Petitioner permitted to serve notice by dasti service.