Punjab-Haryana High Court
State Of Haryana & Anr vs Waryam Singh on 16 January, 2014
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
1. Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Waryam Singh .....Respondent
2. Civil Revision No.1304 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Smt.Kailash & Ors. .....Respondents
3. Civil Revision No.1305 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Surinder Kumar Bali .....Respondent
4. Civil Revision No.1306 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Mohan Deepak & Ors. .....Respondents
5. Civil Revision No.1307 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Gurdip Singh & Anr. .....Respondents
6. Civil Revision No.1308 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Mrs.Swaran Bali & Ors. .....Respondents
Arvind Kumar Sharma
2014.01.22 12:01
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 2
7. Civil Revision No.1309 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Shri Ram & Ors. .....Respondents
8. Civil Revision No.1310 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Smt. Pawan Bali & Ors. .....Respondents
9. Civil Revision No.1311 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Devinder Singh .....Respondent
10. Civil Revision No.1312 of 2004
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Aruna .....Respondent
11. Civil Revision No.1881 of 2006
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Kashmiri Lal & Ors. .....Respondents
12. Civil Revision No.1882 of 2006
State of Haryana & Anr. ......Petitioners
Versus
Pawan Kumar & Anr. .....Respondents
Date of Decision:-16.1.2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.
Present: Mr.O.P.Sharma, Addl. AG Haryana for the petitioners.
Mr.Sudhir Mittal, Advocate for the respondents.
Arvind Kumar Sharma
2014.01.22 12:01
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
Chandigarh
Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 3
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J. (Oral)
As identical questions of law & facts are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the indicated 12 revision petitions, arising out of the similar impugned orders, by virtue of this common judgment, in order to avoid the repetition.
2. Tersely, the facts & material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petitions and emanating from the record, are that in pursuance of the notification dated 10.2.1983, issued under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter to be referred as "the LA Act"), the petitioner-State of Haryana had acquired the land of respondents- landowners/interested persons for public purposes. Having competed all the codal formalities, ultimately, the Land Acquisition Collector announced the award.
3. Aggrieved thereby, the landowners filed the reference petitions u/s 18 of the L.A.Act for enhancement of the compensation. The Land Acquisition Court partly accepted their reference petitions and determined the market value at the rate ` 43.87 P per square yard along with all statutory benefits. The regular first appeals (for short "the RFAs") were decided by this Court, by virtue of judgment dated 28.5.2001, rendered in main RFA No.1848 of 1994, titled as "Kashmiri Lal etc. Vs. State of Haryana and another". The indicated judgment has already attained the finality.
4. Having attained finality of judgment of this Court, the respondents-landowners filed and the executing Court accepted the execution-petitions & awarded all the statutory benefits, including interest Arvind Kumar Sharma 2014.01.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 4 on the compensation on account of damage caused to them u/s 48-A of the LA Act, by means of impugned orders dated 6.12.2003 & 3.9.2005.
5. The petitioners-State of Haryana & another did not feel satisfied and preferred the present revision petitions to challenge the impugned orders, invoking the provisions of Article 227 of the Constitution of India.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable help and after bestowal of thoughts over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant revision petitions in this context.
7. Ex facie, the argument of learned State counsel that since the respondents-landowners were not entitled to the interest on the compensation amount awarded to them u/s 48-A of the L.A.Act, so, the executing Court committed a legal mistake to award interest on such compensation, is not only devoid of merit but misplaced as well.
8. What cannot possibly be disputed here is that this Court while deciding the RFAs, granted compensation and all the statutory benefits in the manner depicted here-in-below:-
"Resultantly, all the aforesaid appeals are partly allowed and I award compensation at the rate of Rs.46/- per Square yard to the appellants. The appellants shall also be entitled to compensation in the shape of damages under section 48 of the Act at the rate of 6% per annum on the market value of the acquired land for the period 2.5.1973 to 20.4.1982. They shall also get additional amount at the rate of 12% on the market value of the land under section 23(A-A) of the Act from the date of notification under section 4 of the Act up to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land whichever is earlier. They shall also be entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% of the market value under section 23(1-A) (2) of the Act besides interest at the rate of 9% on the enhanced amount from the date on which the Collector took possession of the land to the date of payment of such, excess into court for Arvind Kumar Sharmaone year and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of payment.2014.01.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 5 There shall be no order as to costs."
9. Such thus being the position and material on record, now the short and significant question, though important, which invites an immediate attention of this Court, is as to whether the respondents- landowners are entitled to interest on the compensation awarded u/s 48-A of the L.A.Act or not ?
10. Having regard to the rival contentions of learned counsel for the parties, to me, the answer must obviously be in the affirmative.
11. As is evident from the record that all the statutory benefits, including the compensation u/s 48-A of the L.A.Act, were awarded to the landowners. Section 48-A postulates as under:-
"Compensation to be awarded when land not acquired within two years-- (1) If within a period of two years from the date of the publication of the declaration under section 6 in respect of any land, the Collector has not made an award under section 11, with respect to such land the owner of the land shall, unless he has been to a material extent responsible for the delay be entitled to receive compensation for the damage suffered by him in consequence of the delay.
(2) The provisions of Part III of this Act shall apply so far as may be, to the determination of the compensation payable under this section."
12. Sequelly, section 28 posits that "If the sum which, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of [nine per centum] per annum from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess into Court." The proviso to this section further envisages that "the award of the Court may also direct that where such excess or any part thereof is paid into Court after the date of expiry of a period of one year from the date on which possession is taken, interest at the rate of fifteen per centum per annum shall Arvind Kumar Sharma 2014.01.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 6 be payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of such excess or part thereof, which has not been paid into Court before the date of such expiry."
13. A conjoint and meaningful reading of these provisions would reveal that the benefit of section 28, which is a part and parcel of part III of the L.A.Act, with regard to payment of interest "mutatis mutandis" is applicable to the compensation awarded u/s 48-A and is the complete answer to the problem in hand. Therefore, the contrary submissions of learned State counsel "stricto sensu" deserve to be and are hereby repelled under the present set of circumstances. Moreover, the executing Court has correctly negated the plea of State and has passed the impugned order dated 6.12.2003, which, in substance, is as under (Para 6):-
"Learned counsel for the applicant/DH has contended that provision of Section 48A, sub section 2 of the Act has made the provisions of Section 28 of the Act applicable. Once any damages are granted under section 48A of the Act, then interest thereon is a corollary or consequence under the provisions of Section 28 of the Act and in support of his contention he has cited the law laid down by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in a case reported as Inder Chand Jain and others Vs. Collector Agra and another, 1991 Land Acquisition Laws 461 and wherein the relevant observations in this respect was made as follows:-
" Once the Tribunal has recorded a finding that the appellants were entitled to compensation under Section 48-A of the Act then it was necessary for it to have decided the rate of interest payable on such an amount. Section 48A, sub section (2) has made the provisions of Section 28 applicable. This section is included in part III of the Land Acquisition Act."
On perusing the provisions of Sections 48A and 28 of the Act and the above observations made by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, I am of the view that the said provision is clearly attracted in the instant case and, therefore, the petitioner/DH shall also be entitled to the interest on 6 percent damages at the rate of 9 percent for the period of one year from the date of award passed by Land Acquisition Collector and after expiry of one year, the decree holder shall also entitled to interest at the rate of 15 per cent per annum till the amount is paid."
Arvind Kumar Sharma2014.01.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh Civil Revision No.1303 of 2004 along with 11 connected petitions 7
14. Meaning thereby, the executing Court has examined the matter in the right perspective and has recorded the cogent grounds in this behalf. Such orders, containing valid reasons, cannot legally be set aside, in exercise of limited revisional jurisdiction of this Court, as envisaged under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, unless & until, the same are perverse and without jurisdiction. Since, no such patent illegality or legal infirmity has been pointed out by the learned State counsel, so, the impugned orders deserve to be and are hereby maintained in the obtaining circumstances of the case.
15. No other point, worth consideration, has either been urged or pressed by the learned counsel for the parties.
16. In the light of aforesaid reasons , as there is no merit, therefore, the instant revision petitions filed by the petitioners-State are hereby dismissed as such.
Sd/-
(Mehinder Singh Sullar) Judge 16.1.2014 AS Whether to be referred to reporter ? Yes/No Arvind Kumar Sharma 2014.01.22 12:01 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh