Law: Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)

Section: 54 , 5

Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----S. 54---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), S.5---Time-barred appeal ---Condonation of delay---Ground for condonation of delay in filing time-barred appeal was that papers for filing appeal had been handed over to counsel who fell ill and they had come to know that counsel had not filed appeal till time for filing appeal had expired by 63 days---Excuse put forward was so weak and frivolous that even name of counsel was not given so that it could have been verified from him one way or the other ---Condonation of delay was not warranted in circumstances. Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)-- ----Preamble & S.54---Limitation Act (IX of 1908), Preamble, Ss. 5 & 3---Bar of limitation ---Condonation---Applicability of S.5, Limitation Act, 1908 to proceedings under Land Acquisition Act, 1894---S. 3, Limitation Act, 1908 would bar remedy in different cases when relief was sought after specified time for bringing about claim---Section 5, Limitation Act, 1908 was exception to such bar and provided for admission of claim even after expiry of period of limitation provided the appellant or applicant satisfied Court that he had sufficient cause for not preferring appeal or making application within such period---Appellant's contention that S.5, Limitation Act, 1908 would not apply to Land Acquisition Act, 1894, would imply that he was not entitled to benefit of any condonation ---Condonation of delay in filing appeal was refused in circumstances. Land Acquisition Act (I of 1894)--- ----S. 54---Limitation Act (1X of 1908), S.3---Time-barred appeal---Effect--Acquisition Judge's failure to give relief to appellants as per their claim-- Appellant's claim that relief having not been provided to them, Acquisition Judge's decision was without jurisdiction---Validity---Acquisition Judge being Court of reference had full authority to answer reference on basis of evidence brought before him, thus, order passed by such Court was neither coram non judice nor suffered from any defect of inherent jurisdiction, therefore, appeal against such order should have been filed within limitation.   Hussain Bakhsh and others v. Settlement…