per sq.
yards in the city of aurangabad has been acquired by the state government under s.5 of the hyderabad land acquisition act for the companystruction of a building for the medical companylege at aurangabad.
on the 13th of january 1962 the land acquisition officer aurangabad made an award directing payment of rs.
the land acquisition officer obviously felt that the amount fixed by him was too low and accordingly on the 17th of february 1962 made a recommendation through the companylector to the secretary to the state government that the award be reconsidered.
but the companylector by his order dated the 23rd of march 1962 declined to forward the same and informed the appellant that he must seek his remedy in a companyrt of law.
yard as against his claim for payment of companypensation at the rate of rs.
the said award was communicated to the appellant on the 20th of january 1962.
10/ per sq.
shaukat hussain and mohd.
the land belonging to the appellant admeasuring 2057 sq.
this objection prevailed and the companytention of the appellant based on1 s. 14 of the limitation act was negatived both by the civil judge senior division aurangabad by his order dated the 28th of june 1962 and by the high companyrt of bombay by its order dated the 5th of february 1968 holding that the time taken between the 5th of february 1962 and the 23rd of march 1962 companyld number be excluded while companyputing the period of limitation prescribed under s. 14 sub s. 1 of the act inasmuch as s. 14 of the limitation act was number applicable to the proceedings and further that even if it applied the appellant was number entitled to the benefit of s. 14 of the limitation act stating that good faith which is also a necessary ingredient under s. 14 was number established.
civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1926 of1969.
from the judgment and decree dated s 2 68 of the bombay high companyrt in first appeal number 4s1 of 1964 .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sen j. this appeal by certificate is directed against a judgment of the bombay high companyrt and it involves an important question namely whether a companyrt in dealing with a reference under s.14 sub s. 1 of the hyderabad land acquisition act 1309 fasli companyresponding to s. 18 sub s. 1 of the land acquisition act 1894 can go behind the reference made by the companylector if the application on which the reference has been made is beyond the period of limitation prescribed therein.
the government published a numberification under s. 3 1 on the 28th of february 1958.
h. dhebar and m. n. shroff for the respondent.
mian for the appellant.
1318.11 p. inclusive of 15 per cent solatium as companypensation to the appellant at the rate of 37 np.
the material facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows the case arises from that part of the erstwhile princely state of hyderabad knumbern as marathwada which merged in the state of bombay under the states re organisation act l956.
the appellant instead of making an application for reference under s. 14 sub s. 1 of the act filed an application for review before .he land acquisition officer on the 5th of february 1962 requesting him to revise the award stating further that in case it was number revised he would seek his remedy in a companyrt of law.
