KALAWATHI BAI Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against order passed by the Additional Civil Judge, Gulbarga, in Execution No. 168 of 1989, dated 13-12-1990 rejecting the petitioner's contention that he is entitled for interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of taking possession of the land in question.

(2.) A few facts are: The petitioner herein was the owner of land measuring 11 acres and 20 gunttas in Survey Nos. 24/3-B and 24/3-C which acquired by the respondent. Possession was also taken On the reference under Section 18 of the lead Acquisition Act, 1894, in L.A.C. No. 99 of 36, the Additional Civil Judge, Gulbarga, made an order enhancing the compensation that was earlier awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer. The same came to be confirmed by this Court in M.FA. No. 1813 of 1989 on 26-2-1990. After confirming the award passed, a fresh memo of calculation was filed by the petitioner before the Executing Court on 20-3-1990 by deleting 12% additional amount. In the meanwhile the Judgment-debtor/Land Acquisition Officer deposited Rs. 3,20,827-25 ps. on 5-1-1990 and that amount was to be paid to the decree-holder. It was contended by the decree- holder before the Executing Court that the Judgment-Debtor/Land Acquisition Officer is liable to pay the balance of Rs. 1,77,081-27 ps. to him as mentioned in the Memo of calculations dated 20- 3-1990. In support of his memo it was contended by the decree-holder that, as the entire amount of compensation was not paid to him on the date of taking possession of the land acquired, he is entitled under Section 28 of the Act interest on the entire amount of compensation as enhanced by the Court and whatever amount paid by the Land Acquisition Officer and received by the claimant under protest before the reference is liable to be adjusted towards interest. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the decree- holder brought to the notice of the Executing Court the provision of Section 28 read with Section 34 of the Amendment Act 68/1894. Section 28 of the Act reads as follows:

(3.) In support of these contentions Sri Shankar, learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of this Court and also the decisions of the Supreme Court. According to him, in view of Sections 28 and 34 of the Act read with Sections 59 and 60 of the Indian Contract Act, the petitioner/decree-holder has right to first adjust the amount deposited by the Judgment-debtor/Land Acquisition Officer towards interest. Secondly, he has also right in claiming interest on the entire amount of compensation as re-fixed by way of enhancement from the date of taking possession of the land and not from the date of the award passed by the Civil Court which came to be confirmed by this Court in M.FA No. 1813 of 1989. According to him, the compensation, even if it has been enhanced subsequently by the appellate Court, shall be construed to be from the date of taking possession of the land.