Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2018 DIGILAW 245 (HP)

Collector, Land Acquisition v. Nup Ram

2018-03-05

TARLOK SINGH CHAUHAN

body2018
JUDGMENT Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J —Since common question of law is involved in all these appeals, therefore, the same are taken up together for consideration and disposal. 2. However, before adverting to the merits of the case, it would be necessary to notice that seven appeals arising out of the same award, already stand decided by this Court vide judgment dated 26.5.2004 in RFA Nos. 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20 and 24 of 2004 and thus the findings rendered therein are obviously binding upon this Court. 3. In the appeals so decided, it was noticed that the dispute raised therein only pertains to the date of grant of interest on the compensation amount. The learned District Judge had granted the interest from anterior date to the one on which the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short ''Act'') was published. This Court while relying upon the judgments of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another , (2002) 1 SCC 142 , and a Full Bench decision of this Court in State of H.P. and another vs. Kalawati and others, 2003 1 ShimLC 474 , partly allowed the appeals by concluding that the interest on the compensation amount can be awarded only from the date of notification and not from any date earlier to that. It is apt to reproduce the relevant observations, which read thus: "...... The only dispute raised in the present appeals is to the effect that the learned District Judge has erred in allowing the interest on the amount of compensation with effect from June, 1988, that is, the date on which the possession of the land acquired was taken, though the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 22.11.1994 and published on 20.12.1994. The question raised in the present appeals is no more res integra in view of the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon''ble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another , (2002) 1 SCC 142 , and the Full Bench of this Court in State of H.P. and another vs. Kalawati and others, 2003 1 ShimLC 474 . The learned District Judge, therefore, on the face of it, has erred in granting interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from June 1988, that is, a date prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. As a result, the present appeals are partly allowed and after maintaining the assessment of the market value of the land acquired the award of the learned District Judge is modified to the extent that the claimant/respondent(s) shall be entitled to interest on the market value of the land plus solatium thereon at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for a period of one year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of payment/deposit of the enhanced amount." 4. As observed earlier, the instant appeals are part of the batch of the appeals that were decided by learned District Judge in a common reference, the lead case whereof was Reference Petition No. 33 of 2002, titled Binu Ram vs. Collector, Land Acquisition and another, which already stands finally adjudicated vide judgment dated 26.5.2004. 5. Accordingly, all these appeals are partly allowed and after maintaining the assessment of the market value of the land acquired, the award of the learned District Judge is modified to the extent that the claimant/respondent(s) shall be entitled to interest on the market value of the land plus solatium thereon at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4 of the Act for a period of one year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of payment/deposit of the enhanced amount. 6. The appeals are partly allowed in the aforesaid terms, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.