COLLECTOR CUTTACK Vs. SARASWATI JENA FB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These revisions have come before us by way of reference to a larger Bench by one of us substantially on the question as to whether the benefit of S.30(2) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 1984 (Act 68 of 1984) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Amending Act) increasing the solatium and the rate of interest is available to awards which are passed by the Subordinate Judge during the period 30-4-1982 to 24-9-1984 on remand from the High Court but in which cases the original awards had been passed prior to 30-4-1982.

(2.) A brief narration of facts is necessary to illustrate the question raised. The notifications under S.4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were issued on different dates during 1964. The awards were made by the Land Acquisition Officer during 1970 and 1971 determining the valuation of the land at Rs. 10,000/- per acre and granting 15% solatium and 6% interest. On reference made to the Subordinate Judge under S. 18 of the Act (sic) was enhanced to Rs. 43,000/- per acre and awards were drawn up in accordance with S. 26(1) of the Act in the year 1977. First Appeals were preferred as against the awards in this Court during the pendency of which the petitioner deposited the entire amounts under awards and the amounts were withdrawn by the opposite parties. The First Appeals were disposed of remanding the matters to the Subordinate Judge who again decided those in 1980 fixing the market value of the land at Rs. 50,000/- per acrd. First Appeals were again preferred before this Court challenging the valuation fixed. All the First Appeals were disposed of by this Court on 25-2-1982 setting aside the valuation fixed by the subordinate Judge and instead fixing Rs. 40,000/- per acre as the valuation wherever he had fixed it at Rs. 43,000/- and Rs. 43,000/- per acre wherever he had fixed at Rs. 50,000/- per acre as the valuation. This Court also decided that the claimants were entitled to statutory solatium at 15% and interest at 6% on the enhanced amount of compensation from the date of dispossession till payment. As in some cases part of the compensation had already been paid, such amounts were directed to be adjusted and the matters were sent back to the Subordinate Judge to revise the decrees in accordance with the decisions. The Subordinate Judge thereafter drew up the awards under S. 26(1) of the Act making the calculations in accordance with the directions of this Court in 1982. In the meantime after disposal of the second batch of First Appeals the opposite parties filed execution case for different amounts which were also deposited by the petitioner. Again on petitions filed by the opposite parties under O.47, R. 1 read with S. 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as 'C.P.C.') the Subordinate Judge allowed 30% solatium and interest at the rate of 9% for the first year and 15% for the subsequent years and also modified the judgments in the land acquisition cases during 1986. Again on petitions filed by the opposite parties under S.152, C.P.C. for correction of the judgment/ awards, the Subordinate Judge allowed 12% additional compensation under S. 23(1A) and corrected the modified awards to that extent. Thereafter applications were filed by the petitioner before the executing Court contending that since this Court had finally disposed of the appeals on 25-2-1982 and the amounts had already been paid in the previous execution cases, the later execution cases filed by the opposite parties were not maintainable the decrees having been fully satisfied. The applications were rejected directing the petitioner to pay additional amounts. These orders of the Subordinate Judge have been impugned in the present revisions. Since all the revisions raise the common question of law, they are disposed of by this common judgment.

(3.) The reference made by the Hon'ble Mr. Justice A. Pasayat is on the following questions : "