M A BASITH Vs. LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Petition under Section 115 of CPC, to revise the order dated 25/11/2003 in E.P.No.74 of 1998 on the file of the court of the I Additional Senior Civil Judge, R.R. District, at L.B. Nagar, Hyderabad). Common Order: These four revisions have been heard together because they have common features and raise common issue. The factual backdrop of the controversy relevant for the purpose of present revision petitions may be stated thus: Pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) dt.16-10-1982, lands of the revision petitioners and others were acquired. After due enquiry, Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.20,000/- per acre and Rs.2,15,000/- (OP No.204/87) Rs.2,82,037/- (OP No.202/87) for structures. On reference made under Section 18 of the Act, the reference court enhanced the market value at Rs.35,000/- per acre and Rs.50,000/- over and above the compensation awarded for structures in OP Nos.253/87, 204/87, 202/87 and 61/87 respectively. Aggrieved by the said enhancement, claimants (revision petitioners) filed AS Nos.1182/92, 1562/92, 1546/92 and 1732/91 and Land Acquisition Officer filed AS Nos.464/93, 465/93, 407/93 and 1436/91. This court by its common judgment dt. 10-12-1998 in A.S.Nos.1436/1991 and batch allowed the appeals filed by the claimants fixing the compensation at Rs.50,000/- per acre in respect of S.Nos.750, 751 and 752, Rs.55,000/- per acre in respect of S.No.753 and Rs.60,000/- per acre regarding S.Nos.766(B) and 766(C). The claimants are entitled to all statutory benefits including interest from the date of taking possession of the land. Regarding entitlement of benefit under Section 23(1-A) of the Act, additional amount will be given whenever the claimants are entitled to excluding the period during which the lands under acquisition are covered by stay order of the High Court or any other competent court. On allowing such appeals, revision petitioners filed EP Nos.74, 73, 72 and 67 of 1998 respectively, which were ordered on 18-6-2002. The operative portion reads as under: The amount awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer along with the interest is to be arrived at till the date of payment of original compensation fixed by the Land Acquisition Officer.

(2.) The enhanced amount along with other benefits awarded by the trial Court is to be calculated keeping in view of the observations of the trial court in the decree. To the said amount interest is to be calculated till the date of payment made by the Land Acquisition Officer. The rest of the amount is due and payable by the judgment debtor to the decree holder. While calculating the amount, the judgment debtor has to calculate the interest on solatium and other benefits as ordered in the decree. The amount so arrived at shall be paid within one month from the date of the order.

(3.) Pursuant to the said order, necessary calculation memos were filed by the parties. Accordingly, Eps were ordered directing the Judgment Debtor to deposit the differential amount as arrived at by the executing court in the light of the judgment passed by the Apex Court in Premnath Kapur v. National Fertilizer Corporation of India Ltd. (1996 (2) SCC 71). The effect of ordering deposit of the amount is that 30% solatium claimed on the additional market value under Section 23(1-A) was not accepted and deducting the amount from the amount deposited and claiming interest on the balance amount which was deposited and deducting the same towards interest on the balance of all heads, i.e., market value, solatium and additional market value was not permitted and accordingly directed to deposit the differential.