Union of India Vs. Kishan Chand & Ors.
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeal No. 13264 of 1996.
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 837 of 1987)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.86 of the Delhi High Court in R.F.A. No. 82/85 in C.M.P. No. 245 of 1985)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 837 of 1987)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.86 of the Delhi High Court in R.F.A. No. 82/85 in C.M.P. No. 245 of 1985)
Petitioner: Union of India
Respondent: Kishan Chand & Ors.
Apeal: Civil Appeal No. 13264 of 1996.
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 837 of 1987)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.86 of the Delhi High Court in R.F.A. No. 82/85 in C.M.P. No. 245 of 1985)
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 837 of 1987)
(From the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.86 of the Delhi High Court in R.F.A. No. 82/85 in C.M.P. No. 245 of 1985)
Judges: K. RAMASWAMY & G.B. PATTANAIK, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Oct 11, 1996
Head Note:
LAND ACQUISITION
Land Acquisition Act, 1894:
As amended in 1984 – Sections 23(1A), 23(2) – Compensation and award of solatium, interest and additional amount under sections 23(2), 28 & 23(1A). Held as reference Court had decided the matter in December 1973, the respondents were not entitled to solatium, additional amount and interest as per 1984 Amending Act- Instead interest at 6% and solatium allowed at 15% – Modified.
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Notice on respondents 2,3 and 4 to 20 has been returned with postal remarks “Address Incomplete”. Notice on respondent No. 22 has been served. Under these circumstances, notice must be deemed to have been served on them. They are not appearing either in person or through counsel. Notice was limited only to the issue of applicability of the provisions of Amendment Act 68 of 1984.
4. Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on October 24, 1961. The Land Acquisition Officer by his award had granted compensation @ Rs. 2,500/- per bigha. On reference,the Additional District Judge by his award and decree dated December 19, 1973 enhanced the compensation @ Rs. 5,000/- per bigha. The High Court on appeal while enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12,000/- per bigha has given the benefits of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 by enhancing the solatium and interest and additional amount. In view of the fact that the reference Court had decided the matter in December 1973 the respondents are not entitled to the benefits of the enhanced solatium and interest and additional benefit under Sections 23 (2), 28 and 23 (1-A).
5. The appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. Instead, the claimants are entitled to interest @ 6% on the enhanced compensation and solatium at 15%. The judgment of the High Court is accordingly modified. No Costs.
1. Delay condoned.
2. Leave granted.
3. Notice on respondents 2,3 and 4 to 20 has been returned with postal remarks “Address Incomplete”. Notice on respondent No. 22 has been served. Under these circumstances, notice must be deemed to have been served on them. They are not appearing either in person or through counsel. Notice was limited only to the issue of applicability of the provisions of Amendment Act 68 of 1984.
4. Notification under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was published on October 24, 1961. The Land Acquisition Officer by his award had granted compensation @ Rs. 2,500/- per bigha. On reference,the Additional District Judge by his award and decree dated December 19, 1973 enhanced the compensation @ Rs. 5,000/- per bigha. The High Court on appeal while enhancing the compensation to Rs. 12,000/- per bigha has given the benefits of the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 by enhancing the solatium and interest and additional amount. In view of the fact that the reference Court had decided the matter in December 1973 the respondents are not entitled to the benefits of the enhanced solatium and interest and additional benefit under Sections 23 (2), 28 and 23 (1-A).
5. The appeal is accordingly allowed to the above extent. Instead, the claimants are entitled to interest @ 6% on the enhanced compensation and solatium at 15%. The judgment of the High Court is accordingly modified. No Costs.
