https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183199 Special leave petitions filed after long, unexplained delay were not entertained because no sufficient cause was shown under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The petitioners had already pursued reference proceedings, obtained enhanced compensation, and allowed the award to attain finality. The amended compensation provisions in the land acquisition law were held inapplicable, as they were confined to persons covered by Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and did not extend to claimants who had sought reference under Section 18. The earlier observation against technical reliance on limitation by public authorities was treated as a general remark, not a universal bar to a limitation plea. en-us Tue, 26 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jun 2016 14:31:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183199 Special leave petitions filed after long, unexplained delay were not entertained because no sufficient cause was shown under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963. The petitioners had already pursued reference proceedings, obtained enhanced compensation, and allowed the award to attain finality. The amended compensation provisions in the land acquisition law were held inapplicable, as they were confined to persons covered by Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and did not extend to claimants who had sought reference under Section 18. The earlier observation against technical reliance on limitation by public authorities was treated as a general remark, not a universal bar to a limitation plea. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 26 Aug 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183199