http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 3  

PETITIONER: NIADAR AND ORS. ETC. ETC

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. ETC. ETC.

DATE OF JUDGMENT25/01/1991

BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) BENCH: MISRA, RANGNATH (CJ) AHMADI, A.M. (J) SAHAI, R.M. (J)

CITATION:  1991 SCR  (1) 135        1991 SCC  (2) 126  JT 1991 (1)   227        1991 SCALE  (1)107

ACT:      Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Section 54-Appeal to Supreme Court-When lies.

HEADNOTE:      The appellant filed petitions as appeals under  section 54   of  the  Land  Acquisition  Act.   As  they  were   not accompanied  by  any certificate from the  High  Court,  the Registry  sought  directions  as to  whether  the  petitions should  be treated as appeals under section 54 of  the  Land Acquisition Act, or as special leave petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.      Disposing of the petitions, this Court,      HELD:  1.   An  appeal under section  54  of  the  Land Acquisition   Act  would  lie  to  this  Court  only  on   a certificate  granted by the High Court in terms provided  in Order 45. [137H-138A] 2.   In  the  present  cases, as  the  petitioners  did  not approach  the  High Court as required by Section 54  of  the Land  Acquisition  Act  read  with Order  45  of  the  Civil Procedure  Code,  the  matters cannot  be  registered  under Section 54. [138A]      3.The Registry is directed to register these appeals as special leave petitions under Article 136 and place them for preliminary hearing before a suitable Bench. [138B]

JUDGMENT:      CIVIL APPELLATE JURIDICTION: D. Nos. 3490, 3673,  3674, 3689-3699, 3700-3703, 4168 and 4169 of 1989.      Appeal  under Section 54 of the Land  Acquisition  Act, 1894.      S.N. Bhatt for the Appellants.      The following Order of the Court was delivered:                                                        136      These petitions were filed as appeals under Section  54 of   the  Land  Acquisition  Act.   Since  they   were   not accompanied by any Certificate from the High Court that they raised  substantial  questions of law which were fit  to  be decided by this Court, the Registry of this Court has sought

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 3  

direction  as to whether they should be treated  as  appeals under  the aforesaid section or as special  leave  petitions under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.      Section  54  of the Land Acquisition Act  is  extracted below:          "54. Appeals in proceedings before Court-Subject to          the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908          (5  of 1908), applicable to appeals  from  original          decrees,   and  notwithstanding  anything  to   the          contrary  in  any enactment for the time  being  in          force, an appeal shall only lie in any  proceedings          under this Act to the High Court from the award, or          from  any part of the award, of the Court and  from          any decree of the High Court passed on such  appeal          as  aforesaid  an appeal shall lie to  the  Supreme          Court  subject  to  the  provisions  contained   in          Section  110 of the Code of Civil Procedure,  1908,          and in Order XV thereof." It  has  stood  in  this form since  1921  except  that  the expression,  ‘His  Majesty in Council’ was  substituted,  in 1950, with words ‘the Supreme Court’.  Prior to 1921,  there was  no right  to appeal to the Privy Council.  The  Section was amended by Section 3 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act XIX of 1921 as it was held by the Privy Council that  in the  absence of any provision in the Act no  appeal  against the decree of the High Court under the Land Acquisition  Act could be entertained.  But the amendment while permitting an appeal made it subject to the provisions of Section 110  and Order 45 of the Civil Procedure Code.  The substantive right of appeal conferred by Section 54 was thus circumscribed and it could only be entertained either if the valuation of  the subject  matter  was  as specified or the  question  of  law raised was substantial.  In 1950, when the Supreme Court was set up under the Constitution, its original, constitutional, appellate  and  special  jurisdictions  were  spelt  out   in Articles 131 to 136.  The appellate jurisdiction arising out of   civil   proceedings  was  provided  by   Article   133. Originally it provided for an appeal as a matter of right if the  subject  matter  of  dispute  was  not  less  than  the specified amount or the High Court certified it to fit case for  being decided by this Court.  In 1973, the article  was amended and the jurisdiction to entertain an appeal  arising out of civil proceedings became confined to grant of                                                        137 certificate  by  the  High Court that the  case  involved  a substantial  question of law and that in the opinion of  the High  Court the said question needed to be decided  by  this Court.   In keeping with this amendment Section 110  of  the Civil  Procedure  Code  which  provided  for  an  appeal  on valuation  of  the  subject  matter  to  Supreme  Court  was omitted  in 1976.  Order 45 which provided for  appeals  to the  Privy  Council  before 1950 and to  the  Supreme  Court thereafter  was also amended in 1976. Its Sub-rules 2 and  3 which are relevant are extracted below:          "(2).  Application to Court whose decree complained          of-(1)  Whoever  desire to appeal  to  the  Supreme          Court  shall apply by petition to the  Court  whose          decree is complained of.          (2)   Every  petition under sub-rule (1)  shall  be          heard  as expeditiously as possible  and  endeavour          shall  be  made  to conclude the  disposal  of  the          petition  within sixty days from the date on  which          the  petition is presented to the Court under  sub-          rule (1).           (3) Certificate as to value or fitness.-(1)  Every

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 3  

        petition shall state the grounds of appeal and pray          for a certificate.           (i) that the case involves as substantial question          of law of general importance, and          (ii)  that  in the opinion of the  Court  the  said          question needs to be decided by the Supreme Court.          (2)   Upon   receipt of such  petition,  the  Court          shall  direct notice to be served on  the  opposite          party  to  show  cause  why  the  said  certificate          should not be granted." These rules require a person desiring to approach this Court to  move  first  the High Court by a  petition,  from  whose decree,  appeal is sought, stating the substantial  question of  law which needs to be decided by this Court.  The  Court thereafter  is  required to certify if the  requirements  of sub-clause  (i) and (ii) of Sub-Rule (1) of Rule 3 of  Order 45 were satisfied.      It is thus clear that an appeal under section 54 of the Land                                                        138 Acquisition   Act  would  lie  to  this  Court  only  on   a certificate  granted by the High Court in terms provided  in Order  45, admittedly, the petitioners did not approach  the High Court as required by Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act  read  with Order 45 of the Civil  Procedure  Code,  the matters cannot be registered under Section 54.  The Registry is  directed  to  register these appeals  as  special  leave petitions  under Article 136 and place them for  preliminary hearing before a suitable Bench. V.P.R.                                    Order accordingly.                                                        139