Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2
PETITIONER:
THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), P.W.D.SCHEMES, VIJAYAWADA
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
M.A. JABBAR
DATE OF JUDGMENT11/01/1995
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
BENCH:
RAMASWAMY, K.
MANOHAR SUJATA V. (J)
CITATION:
1995 AIR 762 1995 SCC (2) 142
JT 1995 (1) 383 1995 SCALE (1)144
ACT:
HEADNOTE:
JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1.The short point that arises for consideration in these
appeals is whether the claimant-respondent in C.A.
No.1891/89 would be entitled to the additional amount in
terms of s.23(1) of the Land Acquisition Act of 1894 (for
short ’the Act)’ from the date of taking possession, namely,
February 15, 1965. Indisputably, facts are that the
notification under s.4(1) of the Act was published on March
6, 1980, though possession of the land was taken on February
15, 1965. The award under s. 11 was made by the Collector
on September 30, 1983. The High Court of A.P. in A.S. No.95
of 1987 while determining the compensation at Rs. 120/- per
sq. yard awarded solatium @ 30% on enhanced compensation.
The additional amount @ 12% per annum on the market value
from the date of the notification from March 6, 1983 till
the date of the award, namely, September 30, 1983 and
interest @ 9% after taking possession from 15.2.1965 till
14.2.1966 and thereafter @ 15% till the date of payment.
2.This court while granting leave confined the question of
entitlement of the benefits under Amending Act 68/1984. In
view of the fact that the award itself was made after the
Amending Act came into force, the claimant entitled to the
benefits under sub-s.(2) of s.23, solatium on the enhanced
market value at 30% and also interest under s.28. The only
area of dispute is whether the claimant is entitled to
additional amount under s.23(IA), and if so from what date.
It is contended for the State that since possession had
already been taken prior to the Amending Act 68 of 1984 has
come into force, the claimant is not entitled to the
additional amount. On the other hand it is contended for
the claimant that since possession was already taken and the
owner was deprived of the enjoyment of the land, additional
amount should be paid from the date of taking possession
since it was stated under s.23(IA) that the amount shall be
payable from the date of the award or taking possession,
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2
whichever is earlier. Since possession was taken earlier,
the claimants are entitled to the additional amount @ 12%
per annum from the date of taking possession, namely,
February 15, 1965.
3.On a true interpretation of subs.(IA) of s.23, we are of
the considered view that the High Court is right in con-
cluding that the claimants are entitled to the additional
amount at the rate of 12% per annum from March 6, 1980, the
date of publication of the notification till the date of
award, namely, September 30, 1983. Sub-s.(1-A) of s.23
adumbrates that "in addition to the market value of the
land, the Court shall in every case award an amount
calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on
such market value for the period commencing on and from the
date of the publication of the notification under s.4(1), in
respect of such land to the date of the award of the
385
Collector or the date of taking possession of the land,
whichever is earlier". In other words, the owner of the
land who has been deprived of the enjoyment of the land by
having been parted with possession, the Act intended that
the owner be compensated by awarding an additional amount
calculated at the rate of 12_per centum per annum on the
enhanced market value for the period between the date of
notification and the date of award or date of taking
possession of the land whichever is earlier. Admittedly,
possession having already been taken on February 15, 1965,
before publication of the notification under s.4(1) on March
6, 1980, the award of additional amount for the period from
March 6, 1980 to September 30, 1983, i.e. the date of making
the award under s. 11 is perfectly correct. In addition to
other statutory benefits, the owner also is entitled to the
additional amount but to given award additional amount from
February 15, 1965, i.e. from the date of taking possession,
though apparently earlier in point of time mentioned in
s.23(1-A), in effect it amounts to giving retrospective
effect to Sub-s.(1-A) to s.23 under the Amendment Act 68/84.
Even though the Amendment Act was prospective and the
transitory provision had only retro limited activity.
4.Therefore, we hold that the claimants would be entitled to
additional amount of the enhanced market value at 12% per
annum from the date of the publication of the notification
under s.4(1) till the date of the award, since possession
had already been taken before the Amending Act has come into
force. Both the appeal by the State and cross appeal by the
claimant are accordingly dismissed. No costs.
386