Limitation for land acquisition reference claims: Article 137 applies, delay is not condonable, and stale references fail.

Under the Karnataka amendment to Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, a claimant's application under Section 18(3)(b) to compel a reference is governed by Article 137 of the Limitation Act when no specific limitation is prescribed. The application must be filed within three years from expiry of the ninety-day period allowed to the Deputy Commissioner to make the reference, and delay beyond that period bars the remedy. Section 5 of the Limitation Act does not apply to such proceedings, so stale claims cannot be revived by condonation. After limitation expires, neither the Deputy Commissioner can validly make the reference nor can the court compel it.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in Karnataka must be filed within three years from the expiry of ninety days after the claimant's reference application, and whether a delayed application is barred. (ii) Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to an application under Section 18(3)(b) or can be used to condone delay in seeking to compel a reference. (iii) Whether, after expiry of the prescribed period, the Deputy Commissioner can still make a reference and the court can compel it.

Issue (i): Whether an application under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in Karnataka must be filed within three years from the expiry of ninety days after the claimant's reference application, and whether a delayed application is barred.

Analysis: The amended Karnataka scheme gives a claimant ninety days to seek a reference under Section 18(1), and obliges the Deputy Commissioner to make the reference within ninety days. If that is not done, the claimant gets a further right to approach the court under Section 18(3)(b). The Court held that, since no special limitation period is prescribed for that application, Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies. The application must therefore be made within three years from the date when the cause of action arises, namely, on expiry of the ninety days allowed to the Deputy Commissioner. The right to enforce the reference is not perpetual and is lost by inaction beyond that period.

Conclusion: Yes. A Section 18(3)(b) application must be filed within three years of the expiry of the ninety-day period, and any application filed thereafter is barred.

Issue (ii): Whether Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 applies to an application under Section 18(3)(b) or can be used to condone delay in seeking to compel a reference.

Analysis: The Court held that Section 5 has no application to proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act before the acquiring authority, and the same principle governs an application under Section 18(3)(b) before the reference court. Once the statutory period for enforcing the right expires, the remedy itself becomes unenforceable and cannot be revived by condonation under Section 5.

Conclusion: No. Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 does not apply to applications under Section 18(3)(b).

Issue (iii): Whether, after expiry of the prescribed period, the Deputy Commissioner can still make a reference and the court can compel it.

Analysis: Reading Section 18(3)(a) and Section 18(3)(b) harmoniously, the Court held that the Deputy Commissioner's power to make a reference and the claimant's right to compel one both cease when the claimant's remedy becomes time-barred. Accepting the contrary view would permit revival of a stale and unenforceable claim, defeating the legislative purpose of finality and repose in land acquisition matters.

Conclusion: No. After expiry of the prescribed period, neither the Deputy Commissioner can validly make the reference nor can the court compel it.

Final Conclusion: The Karnataka amendment to Section 18 creates a self-contained limitation scheme under which the claimant's right to enforce a reference expires after three years and ninety days, and stale reference claims cannot be revived by Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a special land acquisition scheme confers a right to compel a reference but prescribes no separate period for moving the court, the residuary limitation period applies, and expiry of that period extinguishes the enforceability of the reference remedy, excluding condonation under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963.

---