Limitation for civil court direction to make land acquisition reference runs from expiry of the ninety-day period under Article 137.

An application to the Civil Court seeking a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to make a reference under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act was held to fall under the residuary Article 137 of the Limitation Act, 1963 because no specific limitation period was prescribed. The right to approach the Civil Court arose when the Deputy Commissioner failed to make the reference within the ninety days allowed under the amended scheme, and limitation ran from expiry of that period. As the application was filed more than three years after that date, it was barred by limitation and could not be entertained.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application to the Civil Court seeking a direction to the Deputy Commissioner to make a reference under Section 18(3)(b) of the Land Acquisition Act was governed by Article 137 of the Schedule to the Limitation Act, 1963 and, if so, whether the application filed after more than three years was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The award had been served on the claimants and they had applied within ninety days for reference under Section 18. Under the amended scheme, the Deputy Commissioner was required to make the reference within ninety days, and on his failure the claimants acquired a right to move the Civil Court for a direction to make the reference. No special period of limitation was prescribed for that application, and therefore the residuary Article 137 applied. The limitation period of three years ran from the date when the cause of action accrued, namely on expiry of the ninety days allowed to the Deputy Commissioner. Since the application to the Civil Court was filed beyond three years from that date, it was time-barred.

Conclusion: The application was barred by limitation and could not be entertained.

---