KALIYAPPAN versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Citation: [1988] SUPP. 3 S.C.R. 648 · Decided: 28-10-1988 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: E.S. VENKATARAMIAH · Disposal: Dismissed
cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

KALIYAPPAN 
~ ". 
' 
' 
• 
l 
., 
V, 
STATE OF KERALA & OR,S. 
OCTOBER 28, 1988 
1:'J. 
[E.S. VENKAT;\RAMIAH AND M.H. KANIA, JJ.] 
c 
D 
F 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section llA-Period during which 
a_n award shall be made-Two years from date ~f section 6 declaration/ 
two years of commencement of Amendment Act, 1984. 
The. Kerala. St.ate Government, after. completion of preliminary 
steps, published a declaration on. 18.1.1984. concerning the acquisition 
of petitioner's land ~or a public pµrpQlie. On 24.9.1984 the Land Ac-
qu,isition (A.mendment) Act, 1984 came In.to. force whereby section 11-A 
was il)troduced into. the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Section 11-A 
provif;led that the Collector shall make. an award under section 11 of the 
As\ within a period of two years from the date of publication of the 
declaration, a_nd in the case where the s_aid declaration had been 
pu,bli,s,l_ied before the commencement of the Land Acquisition (Amend-
w.~n.tJ A,ct,_ 1984 within two years from such commencement. 
The Collector made the award on 23.9.1986. The notice of the 
awa_rd was served on the petitio'1"r on J0.9.1986. 
• 
The petitioner challenged the. award. before the High Court of 
Kerala on the grounds (I) that the notice of the award having been 
served on 3.0.9.1986, the. award was not made within the prescribed 
period of two years, and (ii). that there wu Inordinate delay in making the 
award. 
Both the writ petition and· the writ appeal were dismissed hy the 
High Court. 
Dismissing the special Iea,ve petl~lon, i_t was, 
HELD: (1). In section 11-A the words "the. Collector shaU make 
an award within a· per~d, </ft:.r,</ y~a~,· f~om the date of the publication 
of the declaration" mean_ lh/lt the C11llector is empowered to make an 
award. till the. expiry of the last date of the period of two years irrespec-
tlve of the date on. which the l)otice of the award is served upon. the 
. Iii ~rsons Interested in the land. 'To make an award' in this sectio~: 
.. -~ .. ' -
-
,', 
-
. 
•' 
'' . 
' 
. 
' 
648 
KALIYAPPAN v. STATE OF KERALA [VENKATARAMIAH, J.] 649 
means 'sign the award', That is the ordinary meaning to be ascribed to 
the words 'to make an award'. [655C-D I 
(2) It is well-known that the meaning to be assigned to the words 
in a statute depends upon the context in which they are found and the 
purpose behind them. 
(3) The object of and the reason for prescribing the period of 
limitation under section ll·A are different from the object of and the 
reason for prescribing the period of limitation under section 18 of the 
Act and the consequences that would flow from the violation of the rule 
of limitation in the two cases are also different. There is no analogy 
between section 11-A and section 18 of the Act insofar as the above 
question Is concerned. [654C-D; 655E] 
( 4) It would be safer in such cases to rely upon the statute for 
guidance as regards the maximum time that can be taken to make an 
award, instead of proceeding to strike down acquisition proceedings on 
the ground of delay in making the award by applying varying standards 
to different cases even though the maximum time of two years has not 
been exceeded. The time taken by the Land Acquisition Officer in this 
case to make the award cannot be considered to be fatal to the acquisi-
tion proceeding. [656B-C] 
· 
Raja Harish Chandra Raj Singh v. The Deputy Land Acquisition 
Officer, [1962] 1 S.C.R. 676, distinguished. 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition 
(Civil) No. 9096 of 1988. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
From the Judgment and Order dated 2.12. 1987 of the Kerala 
F 
High Court in W.A. No. 933 of 1987. 
P.S. Patti and E.M. Anam for the Petitioner. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
VENKATARAMIAH, J. A piece of land measuring ten and a 
half cents situated at Kozhippathi Village of Chittur Taluk, Palghat 
District, State of Kerala originally belonged to Indrani, wife of the 
petitioner and it now belongs to the petitioner. Under a preliminary 
notification issued under section 3(1) of the Kerala Land Acquisition 
G 
Act on 24.2.1981 the said piece of land along with some other lands 
H 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
650 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1988] Supp. 3 S.C.R. 
. -· 
was proposed to be acquired for a certain public purpose. Both Indrani 
and the petitioner filed objections to the proposed acquisition. After 
overruling the objections the State Government published a declara-
tion under section 6 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Ac
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.