Acquiring beneficiary must deposit assessed damage compensation with interest accruing until deposit.

The State issued a notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, on 14 July 2003, followed by a declaration under Section 6(1) on 4 March 2004, to acquire land belonging to the petitioner.

The award dated 31 January 2007 assessed compensation for the land but stated that compensation for “malkies,” including a damaged pipeline and standing trees, would be determined upon receipt of an estimate.

After the petitioner’s claim was rejected, this Court, in an earlier writ petition, directed the Land Acquisition Officer (LAO) to decide the compensation claim on the relevant material. The petitioner made a further representation on 15 March 2023.

The LAO subsequently estimated the pipeline and pump-set damage at Rs. 1,74,907 and, in communications to respondent No. 2, sought payment of Rs. 14,98,982, including solatium, additional market value and interest calculated up to 30 June 2024. Respondent No. 2 had not paid the amount when the present petition was filed.

Whether respondent No. 2 should be directed to deposit the compensation amount sought by the LAO for the damage to the petitioner’s pipeline and pump set.

Whether further interest was payable on the amount calculated by the LAO up to 30 June 2024 until its deposit.

The acquisition was conducted under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, including Sections 4(1) and 6(1), and the award distinguished compensation for the acquired land from compensation for “malkies” to be assessed separately.

The Court relied on the LAO’s subsequent assessment and communications specifying the amount due, including statutory additions and interest; it cited no separate precedent or statutory provision governing the further interest ordered in this petition.

The Court noted that the LAO had assessed the damage and communicated a total payable amount of Rs. 14,98,982, with interest calculated up to 30 June 2024, and had repeatedly requested respondent No. 2 to deposit it.

Respondent No. 2’s counsel stated that steps would be taken to pay in accordance with the LAO’s communication dated 9 June 2025. In light of that assessment and submission, the Court directed deposit of the amount sought by the LAO and held that interest should continue to accrue until deposit.

Respondent No. 1 was directed to release the amount to the petitioner after following due procedure; any amount already deposited was to be deducted from the balance. No order as to costs.