https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200312 Articles 226 and 227 could be invoked against a Collector's refusal to make a reference, and the existence of a revision under Section 115 CPC did not bar supervisory interference. Limitation for a reference under the proviso to Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 runs from actual or constructive knowledge of the award, not from mere awareness of acquisition proceedings; on that basis, the applications were treated as in time. Waiver under the second proviso to Section 31(2) depends on the claimant's overall conduct, and a prior protest in the payment application was not nullified merely because the receipt did not repeat the protest. The claimant's right to seek reference was therefore preserved. en-us Wed, 16 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Mar 2018 10:17:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200312 Articles 226 and 227 could be invoked against a Collector's refusal to make a reference, and the existence of a revision under Section 115 CPC did not bar supervisory interference. Limitation for a reference under the proviso to Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 runs from actual or constructive knowledge of the award, not from mere awareness of acquisition proceedings; on that basis, the applications were treated as in time. Waiver under the second proviso to Section 31(2) depends on the claimant's overall conduct, and a prior protest in the payment application was not nullified merely because the receipt did not repeat the protest. The claimant's right to seek reference was therefore preserved. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Jul 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=200312