KSHATRA NATH BANERJEE Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the Rules are taken up analogously for hearing as the point is one and the same and are disposed of by this judgment.

(2.) By virtue of Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and proceedings started thereunder the Government acquired a large number of plots of land for development of industries in Durgapur Area and the possession was taken over sometime in 1964. In 1967 there were awards and the petitioners received the amount of the awards in October the same yen. There was an Ordinance being No. 1 of 1967 which was replaced by the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act, 1967. By virtue of Section 4(3) of the Amendment Act of 1967 a provision for the payment of simple interest calculated at 6 per cent per annum on the market value of the land acquired and as determined under Section 23 of the principal Act was made. Thereafter the petitioners were served with a notice under the Amendment Act of 1967 sometime in March 1976 and the petitioners filed applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the Land Acquisition Collector praying for reference to Civil Court. The Land Acquisition Collector by this Order dated 4th June, 1976 rejected the application on the ground of limitation. The petitioners moved the Hon'ble High Court in C.R. Cases No. 3065-72 and by Order, dated 22nd January, 1979 the High Court set aside the aforesaid Order of the L.A. Collector and directed him to dispose of the application under Section 18 of the Act after hearing the parties. The petitioners thereafter contended before the L.A. Collector that by virtue of the Amendment Act of 1967 the awards are incomplete and time does not run till the award is anal. But Order, dated 27th May, 1980 the L.A. Collector rejected the application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act on the ground that the application is barred by limitation and this Order is now under challenge.

(3.) Mr. Banerjee, the learned Advocate appearing for the writ petitioners, submitted that the L.A. Collector failed to appreciate that under Section 4(3) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment & Validation) Act of 1967 interest has been merged with the award itself and the award is not complete and anal until the interest under Section 4(3) of the said. Act be included in the award itself. He further submitted that by virtue of Amendment Act of 1967 the award remains incomplete and does not run till the award is final and so long the condition laid down in Section 4(3) of the Amendment Act exists the Collector has no other alternative but to include the interest in the award itself. The period of limitation is clearly set out in Section 18 of the principal Act. He further submitted that the interest is part of the compensation and not something different from it. When an award is amended the whole award goes and the new award takes its place. In support of his contention that interest is part of the award or compensation Mr. Banerjee cited several decisions including the Union of India v. Ram Mehar and Ors. reported in AIR 1973 SC 305 and. Nagendra Nath Banerjee and Anr. v. Ambika Charan Chakraborti & Ors. reported in 33 CWN 958 = AIR 1929 Cal. 676 as well as Halsbury's laws of England, 4th Edition, Vol. 18 para 1565 on page 916.