DHONDIRAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present appeals have been filed by the original claimants challenging the judgment and award passed in L.A.R. No.997 of 2014, L.A.R. No.991 of 2014, L.A.R. No.993 of 2014 and L.A.R. No.227 of 2009, respectively, by Civil Judge (Senior Division), Osmanabad, dated 27-06-2014, on the ground that the learned reference Court failed to award interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [For short, "the Act"].

(2.) What is not in dispute is, that the appellants were owners of land Gut no.150 situated at village Warwanti, Taluka & District Osmanabad. The respondent acquired land admeasuring 01H 24R, 00H 92R, 01H 09R, 00H 38R, respectively, out of the said gut number for the purpose of common water storage tank at Warwanti / Wadgaon (Siddheshwar), vide notification under Section 4 of the Act, dated 30th December 2005. The award under Section 11 of the Act came to be passed by the Special Land Acquisition Officer on 07-07-2007. The compensation that was given by the Special Land Acquisition Officer was at the rate of Rs. 500, 550/- per R. The present claimants thereafter file reference under 18 of the Act for enhancement. The compensation was enhanced to Rs. 15,000/- per R. The reference Court while passing the judgment and award, as it appears from the submission made by the learned Advocate for the appellants, granted interest under Section 23(1-A) of the Act and Section 34 of the Act. However, interest has not been granted under Section 28 of the Act. Hence, these appeals.

(3.) Learned Assistant Government Pleader supported the award passed by the reference Court and in addition to that, submitted that the interest that has been awarded under Section 34 is improper taking into consideration the fact that it has been award from the date of possession; whereas it ought to have been from the date of award in view of the decision in State of Maharashtra Vs. Kailash Shiva Rangari, 2016 4 BCR 1. He relied on the decision in The State of Maharashtra Vs. Ramesh Tukaram Meshram & another, 2018 1 AllMR 645 wherein it has been held that "The interpretation accorded to Section 34 would also have its equal application while understanding import of Section 28 of the Act." He also relied on the decision in Aba s/o. Dashrath Pawar Vs. State of Maharashtra & another, 2017 1 MhLJ 139 wherein the interest was awarded from the date of the award in view of the Full Bench decision in Kailash Shiva Rangari (supra).