STATEOF MAHARASHTRA Vs. SHYAMKANT DATTARAYA PATIL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of seven appeals may be disposed of by common judgment as they arise out of common order passed by the learned Civil judge (S. D. ) Jalgaon on applications made before him under Land Acquisition act.

(2.) Facts leading to these appeals may be stated in brief thus : the appellant, the State of Maharashtra, acquired certain lands for Hatnoor right Bank Canal which is Distributory of Thorgavan and Manwel, Tq. Yawal. Notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act dated 8-1-1980 was published in the Government Gazette dated 7-2-1980. Special Land Acquisition officer made the award on 3-3-1982 by passing common order in respect of the respondents. The respondents being not satisfied by the amount of compensation as per the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition, made references under section 18 of the said Act. The references were also decided and the Civil Judge (S. D. ) passed awards on 21-12-1984 by enhancing the market value of the lands acquired from them. Pending the references before the Civil Judge (S. D. ) , Land acquisition Act was amended by the Amending Act No. 68/1984 with effect from 24-9-1984. By the said amending Act certain additional benefits were given. By addition of sub-section (1a) to section 23 additional component of the rate of 12% p. a. of market value was provided for the first time. By making amendment in sub-section (2) of section 23, the amount of solatium was increased from 15% to 30% and by making amendment in section 34, rate of interest was also increased from 6% to 9% for first year after taking possession of the land and 15% beyond period of one year after taking possession till the payment of the compensation amount. After the award was passed by the Civil Judge (S. D. ) on reference under section 18, by the judgment dated 21-12-1984, the respondents filed Misc. Applications Nos. 148, 149, 150, 151, 152 and 153 of 1985 and 148/1986 seeking additional benefits in view of the amendment of the Act.

(3.) The applications were opposed on behalf of the State. However, after hearing the parties relying on certain Supreme Court and High Court authorities, the learned Civil Judge (S. D. ) passed the impugned order dated 2-9-1986 granting additional benefits as per the amended provisions of the Land acquisition Act. The said order has been challenged in the present appeals by the state of Maharashtra. It is contended by the State that reference was already decided and the award was passed by the Civil Judge (S. D. ) , on 21-12-1984, and therefore, it had no jurisdiction to entertain the application for grant of additional benefits. Further it is contended that the land acquisition proceedings in question were not pending as on 30-4-1982, since the award was already passed by the collector prior to that date and therefore, the amended provisions would not be applicable to the instant cases. It is contended that the trial Court committed error in passing the impugned order.