The Improvement Trust, Patiala Vs. The Land Acquisition Tribunal and Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No 4695/95
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 7069 of 1995)
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 7069 of 1995)
Petitioner: The Improvement Trust, Patiala
Respondent: The Land Acquisition Tribunal and Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No 4695/95
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 7069 of 1995)
(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 7069 of 1995)
Judges: K. RAMASWAMY & N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 31, 1995
Head Note:
LAND ACQUISITION
Land Acquisition Act, 1894:
Section 23(1-A) – Respondents held not entitled to benefits under Section 23(1A) – Award given earlier to be modified – Appeal allowed.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. Mr. Maheshwari, Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
2. Leave granted.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, the learned senior counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in CA No. 174 and 602-605/82 dated October 29, 1987, wherein the counsel appearing for the appellant had conceded in those appeals that “the respondents have agreed that the provisions of the amending Act shall apply and escalated rates provided therein would be available.” Based thereon, it is contended by Sri Gopal Subramaniam that it is no longer open the appellant to contend that the respondents are not entitled to the benefits provided under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act as amended under Act 68/1984. Section 23(1-A) provides that in addition to the compensation the owner is entitled to the payment of 12% p.a. of the enhanced compensation from the date of the notification under section 4(1) till date of passing award by the Collector or taking possession, whichever is earlier. This is independent of the escalation of the solatium and interest provided under s.s.2 of Section 23 and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended under Act 68 of 1984 respectively. Therefore, what was meant by this Court in the above quoted direction is escalation but not independent of the claims available under section 23(1-A) since by then that question was pending adjudication before this Court.
4. Under these circumstances, the respondents are not entitled to the benefits under section 23(1-A) of Land Acquisition Act. It should accordingly be deleted from the award. It is needless to mention that the respondents shall pay the balance amount as directed by this Court in the earlier order within a period of one month from today. The appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.
1. Mr. Maheshwari, Advocate accepts notice for the respondents.
2. Leave granted.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Gopal Subramaniam, the learned senior counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the order passed by this Court in CA No. 174 and 602-605/82 dated October 29, 1987, wherein the counsel appearing for the appellant had conceded in those appeals that “the respondents have agreed that the provisions of the amending Act shall apply and escalated rates provided therein would be available.” Based thereon, it is contended by Sri Gopal Subramaniam that it is no longer open the appellant to contend that the respondents are not entitled to the benefits provided under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act as amended under Act 68/1984. Section 23(1-A) provides that in addition to the compensation the owner is entitled to the payment of 12% p.a. of the enhanced compensation from the date of the notification under section 4(1) till date of passing award by the Collector or taking possession, whichever is earlier. This is independent of the escalation of the solatium and interest provided under s.s.2 of Section 23 and Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act as amended under Act 68 of 1984 respectively. Therefore, what was meant by this Court in the above quoted direction is escalation but not independent of the claims available under section 23(1-A) since by then that question was pending adjudication before this Court.
4. Under these circumstances, the respondents are not entitled to the benefits under section 23(1-A) of Land Acquisition Act. It should accordingly be deleted from the award. It is needless to mention that the respondents shall pay the balance amount as directed by this Court in the earlier order within a period of one month from today. The appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.
