H. N. TILHARI, J. ( 1 ) HEARD the learned Government Pleader Sri R. K. Hatti, in this second appeal. None appears for the respondent, though served. ( 2 ) THE brief facts of the case are as under : That Vaddina hally village is situated at a distance of 5 K. M. from Davanagere. Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land acquisition Act was issued on 14-2-1980 to acquire buildings and sites situate in said village with the proposal of shifting entire village to new sites. The Land Acquisition Officer after due proceeding awarded compensation for super structure and the sites on the basis of valuation made by Assistant Executive engineer, Division No. 2 and gave the award on 23-4-1981. That not being satisfied with the compensation awarded the respondent i. e. , claimant moved application for reference for enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act. The Civil Judge, after considering the matter and material on record, accepted the reference and ordered as under :"the reference made under Section 18 of the Land acquisition Act, for short, 'act', are accepted. The claimants are entitled for enhancement of 65% over and above the valuation allowed to super structures by respondent. They are also entitled for compensation to their sites at Rs. 10/- per sq. metre. The said claimants are further entitled for solatium of 30%, additional compensation @ 12% per annum from date of notification under Section 4 of the Act 14-2-1980 to the date of award i. e. , 23-4-1981, with interest on enhanced compensation @ 9% per annum till the first year from the date of taking possession and for subsequent period at the rate of 15% per annum till entire compensation is paid, less the amount already received by claimant". Feeling aggrieved from the order of the Civil Judge dated 21-4-1990, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, filed the appeals before the District Judge, Chitradurga. ( 3 ) THE lower Appellate Court dismissed the appeal, so the appellant, i. e. , Special Land Acquisition Officer, has preferred the Second Appeal. Feeling aggrieved from the order of the Civil Judge dated 21-4-1990, the Special Land Acquisition Officer, filed the appeals before the District Judge, Chitradurga. ( 3 ) THE lower Appellate Court dismissed the appeal, so the appellant, i. e. , Special Land Acquisition Officer, has preferred the Second Appeal. The learned Government Pleader-Sri R. K. Hatti, submitted and challenged that portion of the order whereunder the additional compensation at the rate of 12% P. A. on market value of land acquired has been awarded to respondent, with interest thereon from 14-2-1980, to the date of award, that is 23-4-1981, along with other amounts like interest, at the rate of 9% per annum for the first year from the date of taking possession and for subsequent period @ 15% per annum till the date of entire compensation amount paid, less the amount already received by the claimant has been awarded. The claim in the appeal is confined only to the question whether the Civil Judge, davanagere, while allowing the reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act has committed the error of law in conferring additional compensation at the rate of 12% per annum of market value of the land under Section 23 (1-A) of the land Acquisition Act from 14-2-1980 to the date of award 23-4-1981, and in awarding interest thereon, and other amounts like interest in respect thereof as awarded is not the subject of dispute in this appeal. Further, Sri Hatti, learned Government pleader contended that the benefit under Section 23 (1-A) of the land Acquisition Act, for short, 'act' could not be conferred on the respondent on account of the fact that in the present case, though acquisition proceeding commenced on 14-2-1980, i. e. , before 30-4-1982, but the Collector had already made his award on 23-4-1981, that is, before 30th April, 1982 and so, in view of section 30 (1-A) of Act 68 of 1984, Section 23 (1-A) of the Act as added, in Section 23 will not apply and did not apply. Thus, the learned Government Pleader based his arguments on the language of Section 30, that is, the transitional provision contained in the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1980, hereinafter referred to as, the 'amending Act'. ( 4 ) NONE has appeared to contest the appeal inspite of notice having been served on the respondent. Thus, the learned Government Pleader based his arguments on the language of Section 30, that is, the transitional provision contained in the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1980, hereinafter referred to as, the 'amending Act'. ( 4 ) NONE has appeared to contest the appeal inspite of notice having been served on the respondent. ( 5 ) I have applied my mind to the contentions of the learned Government Counsel for the Appellant. There appears much substance in the contention of the learned Government Pleader sri R. K. Hatti. That by Amendment Act (Act No. 68 of 84), sub-section I-A has been introduced in Section 23 of the Act, vide section 15 (a) of Act 68 of 1984, which provides for the additional amount of compensation. That as Section 23 (1-A) of the Act was introduced and added by Section 15 (a) of the Amending Act 58 of 1984 and Section 30 of the Amending Act, i. e. , Act No. 68 of 1984, have material bearing on the question involved. Section 23 (1-A) reads :"in addition to the market value of land as above provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 sub-section (1) in respect of such land, to the date of Award or the date of taking possession of the land whichever is earlier". The explanation is not material and is not being quoted. That section 30 of the Amending Act reads as under :"30. Transitional provisions : (1) The provisions of sub-section (1-A) of Section 23 of the Principal Act, as inserted by clause (a) of Section 15 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to : (a) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the Principal Act pending on the 30th day of April, 1982 (the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People), in which no award has been made by the Collector before that date ; (b) Every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the Principal Act commenced after that date, whether or not an award has been made by the Collector before the date of commencement of this Act. (2) The Provisions of sub-section (2) of Section 23 and section 28 of the Principal Act, as amended by clause (b) of section 15 and Section 18 of this Act respectively, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to, any award made by the Collector or Court or to any order passed by the High Court or Supreme Court in appeal against any such award under the provisions of the principal Act after the 30th day of April, 1982 (the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of People) and before the commencement of this Act". ( 6 ) THE date of introduction of bill of the Amending Act is 30th April, 1982 and the date of the commencement of the Amending act, is 24th September, 1984. A perusal of clause (a) of Section 30 (1) per se reveals that as regards sub-section (1-A) of Section 23 inserted by Section 15 (a) of the Amending Act has been made applicable to the proceedings for acquisition of any land under the Principal Act pending on the date of introduction of the bill and the benefit of additional compensation under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act has been provided to be made available in respect of land acquisition proceedings which were pending even on 30th april, 1982, provided the Collector has not before that date, that is, before 30th April, 1982, made the award, that is, if the collector has already made an award before 30th April, 1982, in respect of acquisition proceedings pending on 30th April, 1982, then benefit of Section 23 (1-A) will not be available, that is, collector will not be entitled to reopen the award so made. Clause (b) of Section 30 deals with the proceedings for acquisition of land under the Principal Act which had commenced after 30th April, 1982, and not earlier. With reference to those cases, Section 30 provides that benefit of section 23 (1-A) as inserted by Section 15 (a) of the Amending Act shall be available as Section 23 (1-A) shall be deemed to have applied to those proceedings irrespective of the fact that collector has or has not made any award before the date of commencement of the Amending Act. Making of award by the collector before the date of Amending Act in respect of proceedings for acquisition of land commenced after 30th April, 1982, will have no bearing as regards the applicability of Section 23 (1-A) is concerned. A reading of these two clauses per se indicates that so far as proceedings for acquisition of land which had commenced earlier to 30th April, 1982 and pending on 30th april, 1982, the question of making award by the Collector before 30th April, 1982, will have a material bearing in the sense that to such a case, where award by collect has been made before 30-4-1982, benefit of Section 23 (1-A) will not be available, as it will not apply. So far as the cases, where proceedings for acquisition of land started as per under clause (b) of Section 30 (1) after 30th April, 1982, and it can be said that, that person will be entitled to the benefit of Section 23 (1-A) irrespective of the making of award or not before the date of commencement of the Act. As regards the benefit of Section 23 (2) and Section 28 of the Principal Act, sub-section 2 of Section 30 of the Amending act, clearly reveals that these provisions shall apply and shall be deemed to have applied in relation not only to award made by the Collector, but also by Court and to the orders made by the high Court or Supreme Court against such award under the provisions of the Principal Act, after 30th April, 1982 and before the commencement of the Act. Thus, it appears that so far as the present proceedings are concerned, the Land Acquisition proceedings had commenced on 14-2-1980, and admittedly, the proceedings were pending at the stage of reference before the civil Court on 30th April, 1982, but the award in this case had already been made by the Collector before 30th April, 1982, as mentioned earlier, on 23-4-1981. So, this is a case in view of section 30 (1) clause (a) of Act No. 68 of 84, in my opinion, the learned Reference Court, that is, the learned Civil Judge had no jurisdiction or power to award or confer any benefit under section 23 (1-A) of the Act, that is, the additional compensation at the rate of 12% of the determined market value, with interest thereon from 14-2-1980, to the date of award, that is, 23-4-1981. ( 7 ) FOR my above view, I find support from the decision of the Constitution Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of k. S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and Others, wherein paragraphs 81 and 87, their Lordship of Supreme Court observed as under :"a perusal of sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the amending Act shows that it divides the proceedings for acquisition of land which had commenced prior to the date of commencement of the Amending Act into two categories, proceedings which had commenced prior to April 30, 1982 and proceeding which commenced after April 30, 1982, while clause (a) of Section 30 (1) deals with the proceedings which commenced prior to April 30, 1982 clause (b) deals with proceedings which commenced after April 30, 1982. By virtue of clause (a) of Section 23 (1-A) has been made applicable to proceedings which commenced prior to April 30, 1982, if no award had been made by the Collector in those proceedings before April 30, 1982. It covers (a) proceedings which were pending before the Collector on april 30th, 1982, wherein award was made after April 30, 1982, but before the commencement of the Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made by collector after the commencement of Amending Act. Similarly, Section 30 (l) (b) covers (a) proceedings which had command after April 30th, 1982, wherein award was made prior to the commencement of Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made after the commencement of Amending Act". Similarly, Section 30 (l) (b) covers (a) proceedings which had command after April 30th, 1982, wherein award was made prior to the commencement of Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made after the commencement of Amending Act". In para 87 of the report, there Lordships further observe as under :"for the reasons above-mentioned, it must be concluded that in respect of acquisition proceedings initiated prior to the date of commencement of the Amending Act the payment under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act will be restricted to matters referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the Amending Act. Union of India and another v Zora Singh and Others, insofar as it holds that the said amount is payable in all cases where the reference was pending before the Reference Court on September 24, 1984, irrespective of the date on which the award was made by the Collector, does not lay down the correct law". 8. This above view has been followed in a latter decisions ofthe Supreme Court, namely K. S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and Others , in Khanna Improvement Trust v Land Acquisition tribunal and Others and Special Land Acquisition Officer v proceedings which had commenced prior to April 30, 1982 and proceeding which commenced after April 30, 1982, while clause (a) of Section 30 (1) deals with the proceedings which commenced prior to April 30, 1982 clause (b) deals with proceedings which commenced after April 30, 1982. By virtue of clause (a) of Section 23 (1-A) has been made applicable to proceedings which commenced prior to April 30, 1982, if no award had been made by the Collector in those proceedings before April 30, 1982. It covers (a) proceedings which were pending before the Collector on april 30th, 1982, wherein award was made after April 30, 1982, but before the commencement of the Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made by collector after the commencement of Amending Act. Similarly, Section 30 (l) (b) covers (a) proceedings which had command after April 30th, 1982, wherein award was made prior to the commencement of Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made after the commencement of Amending Act". Similarly, Section 30 (l) (b) covers (a) proceedings which had command after April 30th, 1982, wherein award was made prior to the commencement of Amending Act and (b) such proceedings wherein award was made after the commencement of Amending Act". In para 87 of the report, there Lordships further observe as under :"for the reasons above-mentioned, it must be concluded that in respect of acquisition proceedings initiated prior to the date of commencement of the Amending Act the payment under Section 23 (1-A) of the Act will be restricted to matters referred to in clauses (a) and (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the Amending Act. Union of India and another v Zora Singh and Others, insofar as it holds that the said amount is payable in all cases where the reference was pending before the Reference Court on September 24, 1984, irrespective of the date on which the award was made by the Collector, does not lay down the correct law". ( 8 ) THIS above view has been followed in a latter decisions of the Supreme Court, namely K. S. Paripoornan v State of Kerala and Others , in Khanna Improvement Trust v Land Acquisition tribunal and Others and Special Land Acquisition Officer v n. S. Takkalaki, and in the case of Malapraba Dam Project v madivalappa Basalingappa Melavanki. ( 9 ) THUS considered in my opinion, this appeal deserves to bepartly allowed. It is hereby partly allowed, by modifying the order passed by the learned Civil Judge under Section 18 to the extent that as the collector's award in this case has been made earlier to the date referred in clause (a) of Section 30 (1), the awarding of additional compensation at the rate of 12% under section 23 (1-A) of the Act over and above the compensation from the date of commencement of acquisition proceedings 14-2-1980 to the date of award, that is, 23-4-1981, is erroneous and illegal and order of Appellate Court affirming the order of Civil Judge to the extent, it affirms Trial Court's order in this regard only is found be illegal and erroneous in law so both orders to this extent set aside. The other benefits that has been conferred in the order of the Civil Judge under Section 18, as affirmed by 1st appellate Court with regard to compensation solatium or interest or the rate of interest provided on those amounts is maintained. Hence, this appeal is partly allowed as mentioned above. Cost is made easy. --- *** --- .