STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PRABHAKAR SADASHIV KALE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RESPONDENTS No.1A, B and C though served are absent, none present for them. Shri Ghadge present for respondent No.2.

(2.) MRS . Kantharia, Counsel appearing for the State of Maharashtra, submitted that the learned Reference Court should not have granted 15% interest on the amount which was payable and it was to the tune of Rs. 19,384.20 paise from 6/6/1976 till its payment, if it was found outstanding and payable before 6/6/1975. She further submitted that the learned Judge should not have also granted amount of Rs.5,326.20 as additional solatium in view of section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act. She further submitted that the amount of interest at the rate of 6% per annum should not have been also allowed in view of section 34 of Civil Procedure Code. Thus, she submitted that the said judgment and award be modified by deleting these three payments awarded to respondent No.1 A, B and C. Shri Ghadge adopted the arguments advanced by the learned A.P.P. for the State.

(3.) NOT only that he has quoted the judgment of Full Bench of Karnataka High Court in the matter of Special Land Acquisition Officer, Dandoli Vs. Soma Gopal Gowda, reported in A.I.R. Karnataka, Page 179, wherein Full Bench of Karnataka High Court held that;