As Khazan Singh was number satisfied with the amount fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer he moved an application under Section 18 of the Act for making a reference to the Civil Court.
The Additional District Judge rejected the said petition on the ground that there was numbersufficient cause for the absence of the appellant or his companynsel on 29.9.1997.
He made an unsuccessful bid to have the reference restored to the file.
The Land Acquisition Officer, acting on the said application made the reference.
2002 1 SCR 431 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by THOMAS, J. Leave granted.
In the meanwhile Khazan Singh died and the present appellants filed an application quoting Order 9 Rule 9 and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Code for short for restoration of the reference.
Appellants thereafter filed an appeal before the High Court.
It was pending before the Court of a District Judge.
The High Court also did number help him as per the impugned order.
Appellants are the legal heirs of one Khazan Singh.
On 29.9.1997 the Additional District Judge dismissed the reference on the premise that neither the applicant number his companynsel appeared in the Court on the said date.
Certain area of land belonging to the said Khazan Singh was acquired under the provisions of the Act and an award was passed by the Collector Land Acquisition Officer on 16.7.1984, fixing the companypensation payable to the land owners.
Can the reference made by a Collector under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short the Act be dismissed for default?
