Limitation Act Applies to Land Acquisition Appeals Under Section 74 of 2013 Act: Supreme Court Condones Delays

High Courts dismissed as time-barred the first appeals filed by land acquisition officers against awards of the Reference Court under the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, holding that Section 74, which allows 60 days and a further 60 under its proviso, shut out Section 5 of the Limitation Act (paras 3, 75-76, 81). Many acquisitions began under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, but the awards were passed after the 2013 Act came into force, raising which law governed them (para 4). The Attorney General assisted the Court at its request (para 2).

Section 74 provides one period of limitation of 60 days; its proviso merely brings an appeal filed within a further 60 days within that period and is not an extension (paras 75-76). Section 74 does not expressly exclude Sections 4 to 24 of the Limitation Act, and under Section 29(2) a special law's period is read with those provisions unless expressly excluded (paras 60-61, 76-77). Section 103 makes the 2013 Act additional to, not in derogation of, other laws; reading Section 74 to bar the Limitation Act would make Section 103 and Section 29(2) otiose (paras 78-79). As the Act is welfare legislation on just compensation, a liberal approach applies both under the proviso and under Section 5 (para 80). Awards passed after the 2013 Act came into force follow that Act, so the appeals lie under Section 74, not Section 54 of the 1894 Act (para 97). Decisions on other statutes with similar provisions were held inapplicable (paras 87, 96). About 530 delayed appeals showed official connivance or carelessness, calling for accountability (paras 84-85).