WARDINGTON LYNGDOH AND ORS. versus THE COLLECTOR, MAWKYRWAT

Citation: [1995] 3 S.C.R. 354 · Decided: 17-04-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, B.L. HANSARIA · Disposal: Dismissed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
WARDINGTON LYNGDOH AND ORS. 
v. 
THE COLLECTOR, MAWKYRWAT 
APRIL 17, 1995 
B 
[K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.] 
Land Acquisition Act, 1894: 
Sections 18, 19, 23, 31-Award of compenrntion under an agree-
C ment-Subsequently objecting and claiming higher compensation-Reference 
made and the reference coun awarded higher compensation-Validity of the 
reference-Held: Reference application itself not maintainable. 
In respect of certain lands acquired, the Collector made an award. 
The petitioners received compensation under an agreement signed by tbem 
D and the Collector. Thereafter tbey claimed enhancement by reference 
under S.18. After hearing them, the Collector referred the matter to the 
Special Judicial Officer. Objection was taken to the validity of the reference 
and also their entitlement to higher compensation. However, the compen-
sation was enhanced at the rate of Rs. 60 to Rs. 40 per sq. meter. On 
E appeal by the State, tbe High Court reversed the decree of tbe reference 
court since tbe appellants had agreed to tbe terms and conditions of tbe 
agreement. Hence this special leave petition. 
The petitioners contended that since they had objected to the award, 
tbough after receiving the compensation, the reference was valid and the 
F Special Judicial Officer was within his power to consider proper value of 
the lands and award compensation under S.23 of tbe Act. 
Dismissing tbe petition, this Court 
HELD : 1. The persons interested in tbe land are entitled to receive 
G compensation awarded by the Collector under s.11 under protest and 
entitled to object to tbe compensation determined by the Collector. No 
person who had received the amount otherwise tban under protest is 
entitled to make application under s.18. Thus the receipt of the amount 
under protest is a condition precedent to make an application under s.18 
H witbin the limitation prescribed under tbe proviso to sub-s.(2) of s.18 
354 
'. 
... 
W.L YNGDOH v. COLLECTOR 
355 
together with the grounds on which the objections have been taken. There- A 
on the Collector is enjoined to make a reference to the Civil Court with 
the statement in the manner stated in s.19. (357-D, E) 
2. The petitioners professed lack of knowledge regarding the jointly 
signed agreement Ex.·B or its content. This stand stoutly taken at the 
enquiry before the Judicial Officer is obviously an after thought. They B 
admitted that they did not file any protest at the time of receiving compen-
sation. Only one claimant, had filed an objection petition, that too one 
week after the receipt of the compensation without protest. He stated at 
the enquiry that he signed a blank paper. He admitted that the signature 
in the joint statement was his bot stated that the contents of Ex.·B were C 
not explained to him. The High Court minutely examined the evidence of 
all the witnesses and concluded that their claim of oral protest was belied 
by the written agreement Ex.-B. It had gone into the evidence on merits 
and i'ound that award of compensation for the paddy fields and other lands 
at the rates of Rs. 60 to Rs. 40 per sq. meter was highly excessive and 
reliance upon unregistered sale deeds in relation to other homestead D 
lands was illegal. It is credulous to .believe that agricultural lands would 
be sold and purchased on square meter basis. The finding of the High 
Court that the reference application itself is not maintainable, is perfectly 
legal and does not warrant interference. (357-F to H, 358-A, BJ 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition (C) 
No. 11083 of 1995. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 7.6.94 of the Gauhati High 
Court in F.A.No. 36 of 1993. 
AM. Mazumdar and S.K Nandy for the Petitioners. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered: 
Delay condoned. 
Notification under s.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1890 (for 
short, 'the Act') was published .on December 6, 1988 for construction of 
explosive magazines at Nawkyrawat. The Collector made his award on May 
E 
F 
G 
17, 1989. On July 5, 1989 the appellants received the compensation under 
Ex.-B, which is an agreement signed by them and the Collector. Thereafter, H 
356 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995] 3 S.C.R. 
A on August 8, 1989, the respon:lents objected to the amount of compensa-
tion determined by the Collector and they claimed enhancement by refer-
ence under s.18. On August 22, 1989, the Collector asked them to appear 
before him. On August 29, 1989, on which date when ap
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.