https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287237 The Supreme Court held that the application for reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was time-barred as it exceeded the three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Despite the Deputy Commissioner's delay in making the reference, the Court emphasized the significance of adhering to limitation periods, overturning the High Court's decision and rejecting the respondent's application. The Court highlighted the importance of timely resolution of disputes, especially in cases involving special statutes. en-us Tue, 08 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Apr 2020 14:22:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287237 The Supreme Court held that the application for reference to the Civil Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was time-barred as it exceeded the three-year limitation period under Article 137 of the Limitation Act. Despite the Deputy Commissioner's delay in making the reference, the Court emphasized the significance of adhering to limitation periods, overturning the High Court's decision and rejecting the respondent's application. The Court highlighted the importance of timely resolution of disputes, especially in cases involving special statutes. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 08 Feb 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287237