JUDGMENT (Dev Darhsna Sud, J.) (Oral) - This appeal has been preferred by the State against the award passed by the learned Additional District Judge (hereinafter referred to as the Reference Court). 2.The basic grievance of the State is that the award includes within its ambit interest awarded to the claimants from the date of possession and not from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Learned Additional Advocate General submits that notification under Section 4 was issued subsequent to the taking over of the possession. She submits that in terms of the judgments passed by this Court in Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2002(3) Shim.L.C. 45 : 2003(2) Cur.L.J. (H.P.) F.B. 503 following the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, 2002(1) SCC 142, no interest can be awarded for the period prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. She also places reliance on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, 2002(1) SCC 142 and R.L. Jain (D) by LRs. v. DDA and others, 2004(4) SCC 79, holding that the Act does not contemplate payment of any sum prior to issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act. 3.The proposition of law as laid down in these three judgments cannot be disputed. 4.Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that although notification under Section 4 of the Act may have been issued subsequent to taking over of possession of the land, however, the claimants entitlement to receive rent and damages for use and occupation of the property prior to the date of acquisition cannot be denied by the State. He has placed reliance on judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Land Acquisition Officer and Asstt. Commissioner and another v. Hemanagouds and others, 2005(12) SCC 443. 5.These appeals is accordingly accepted and the following directions are issued : (i) Appeal remanded to the reference Court. (ii) On remand the reference Court will re-determine the compensation in accordance with the decision in Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another; R.L. Jain (D) by LRs. v. DDA and others. (ii) On remand the reference Court will re-determine the compensation in accordance with the decision in Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another; R.L. Jain (D) by LRs. v. DDA and others. (iii) The claimants will be at liberty to establish their validly acceptable claim for reimbursement money/compensation for use of their property by the State without recourse to the proceedings under the Act. For this purpose, the claimants as well as the State would be free to adduce evidence in accordance with law. It is clarified that no other evidence except that which is necessary for determination of compensation for use of the land and deprivation of its use by the claimants by the State prior to notification under Section 4 of the Act will be allowed. (iv) Parties are directed to appear before the learned Reference Court on 6.6.2008. The Reference Court shall dispose of the matter before 31.12.2008. 6.This appeal is disposed of with these directions. There shall be no order as to costs. M.R.B. ———————