ORDER 1. By means of this appeal the petitioner-appellants (the land owners) have challenged the award, dated 12th September, 2006, passed by the learned Land Acquisition Judge, Khowai, West Tripura in Misc. (LA) 25 of 2004 whereby the value of the lands of the petitioner-appellants has been assessed at Rs. 12,000/- per kani and they have been held entitled to interest only @ 6% per annum and solatium @ 15% per annum. 2. Vide notification dated 24.7.1967, published in the Tripura Gazette on 05.8.1967, the Government of Tripura acquired land measuring 2.162 acres in Mouja Khowai town under Khowai Sub-Division for the purpose of construction of office of the Sub-Divisional Officer and staff quarters of the officials. 3. Unfortunately, the land belonging to the petitioners was not assessed to any compensation because the said land was at the relevant time depicted in the revenue record as ‘Khas land’ (Govt. owned land). Thereafter the petitioners filed litigation claiming that they were the owners of the land and compensation be paid to them. The petitioners filed a writ petition being Civil Rule No. 32 of 1991 before the Gauhati High Court which then exercised jurisdiction over the State of Tripura. This petition was withdrawn and thereafter Civil Rule No. 99 of 1992 was filed. Vide order dated 19.11.1992 the High Court directed that compensation in accordance with law be paid to the petitioners. Again on 08.12.1993 the Court directed the authorities concerned, to proceed with the matter and comply with the earlier orders of the Court. Finally the writ petition was disposed of on 21.9.1994 with a direction to the authorities to expedite the matter with regard to the payment of compensation with interest as permissible under law within a period of one month. 4. Vide notification dated 16.9.1995 the Government offered some amounts to the owners. Thereafter the land owners made a representation to the Sub Divisional Officer, Khowai claiming that the amount offered was inadequate and therefore, they prayed for a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. This representation was received in the office of the Collector on 11.10.1995. However, no reference was made and thereafter the petitioners filed Civil Rule No. 292 of 1997 before the Gauhati High Court. This representation was received in the office of the Collector on 11.10.1995. However, no reference was made and thereafter the petitioners filed Civil Rule No. 292 of 1997 before the Gauhati High Court. This writ petition was allowed and a direction was issued to Land Acquisition Collector, West Tripura to make a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act for determination of the quantum of award. Pursuant to this direction the proceedings under Section 18 were initiated and the impugned award was passed. 5. The learned Land Acquisition Judge has assessed the value of the land at Rs. 12,000/- per kani. The petitioners have placed reliance on two earlier awards in regard to the very same notification wherein lands were acquired for the very said purpose i.e. construction of office and staff quarters of the SDO. In one case the value of the land which was ‘Viti land’ (homestead land) was assessed at Rs. 22,000/- per Kani. In the other case where the land was ‘Nal’ and ‘Lunga’ the assessment was made at Rs. 14,000/- per kani. The leaned L.A Judge held that since in the present case the land is ‘balurchar’ (sandy land near a river bed) and ‘layek patit’ (abandoned land which is otherwise fit for cultivation) and since this class of land is of lower value he awarded Rs. 12,000/- per Kani. 6. First comes the question as to the classification of the land. At the outset one must notice that the land even at the time of its acquisition was part of Khowai town. It was, therefore, an urban piece of land. No doubt, the lands were cultivated lands but it is apparent that the lands had potential for use of construction purposes. The potentiality to be used for construction purposes can be judged from the fact that the lands were used for construction of office and staff quarters which are in the heart of Khowai town even today. Therefore, the classification of land would not be very material. 7. Having said so, the fact remains that in earlier litigation the valuation was done on the basis of classification of land and the higher class of land was awarded compensation @ Rs. 22,000/- per kani and the lower class @ Rs. 14,000/- per kani. Therefore, the classification of land would not be very material. 7. Having said so, the fact remains that in earlier litigation the valuation was done on the basis of classification of land and the higher class of land was awarded compensation @ Rs. 22,000/- per kani and the lower class @ Rs. 14,000/- per kani. Even if I exclude the higher classification then this land will have to be valued at the lower class of the land and therefore, the value of the land is assessed at Rs. 14,000/- per kani. 8. Next comes the question of payment of interest. The learned Land Acquisition Judge has awarded interest only @ 6% per annum as per the Land Acquisition Act as it stood prior to its amendment in the year 1984. Similarly, he has also awarded solatium only @ 15% per annum. Section 30 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 reads as follows : “30. Transitional provision -- (1) The provisions of sub-section (1-A) of Sec. 23 of the Principal Act, as inserted by Cl. (a) of Sec. 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 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 commencement of this Act. (2) The provisions of sub-section (2) of Ss. 23 and 28 of the principal Act, as amended by Cl. (b) of Ss. 15 and 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 later than 30th day of April, 1982 [the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People] and before the commencement of this Act. (3) The provisions of Sec. 34 of the principal act, as amended by Sec. 20 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to and in relation to - (a) every case in which possession of any land acquired under principal Act had been taken before the 30th day of April, 1982 [the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People], and the amount of compensation for such acquisition had not been paid or deposited under Sec. 31 of the principal Act until such date, with effect on and from that date; and (b) every case in which such possession had been taken on or after that date but before the commencement of this Act without the amount of compensation having been paid or deposited under the said Sec. 31, with effect on and from the date of taking such possession.” A bare perusal of sub-section (1) of Section 30 clearly shows that as far as Section 23 of the amended Act is concerned, that shall apply to all proceedings where the acquisition may have commenced prior to 30th April, 1982, i.e. the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill 1982, wherein no award had been made by the Collector before the commencement of the Act. 9. Therefore, if the proceedings were pending on 30th April, 1982 and no award had been made in respect of the land of the present landowners on the date of commencement of the Act, Section 23(1)(a) of the amended Act would apply. Similarly, the provisions of Sections 23 and 28 of the principal Act, as amended after 1984, are applicable since the award was passed after 30th April, 1982 and land acquisition proceedings under Section 18 of the Act were initiated only after the judgment in Civil Rule 292 of 1997 was announced on 29.8.2000. Therefore, there can be no manner of doubt that in the present case, the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in the year 1984 are applicable and the Land Acquisition Judge erred in not applying the provisions of the amended Act. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussions the appeal is allowed. The value of the land is enhanced from Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 14,000/- per kani. 10. In view of the aforesaid discussions the appeal is allowed. The value of the land is enhanced from Rs. 12,000/- to Rs. 14,000/- per kani. The claimants shall also be entitled to solatium, additional compensation and interest in terms of Sections 23(1)(a), 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended in the year 1984. With these observations the appeal is disposed of. Send down the LCRs forthwith. Appeal allowed.