COLLECTOR Vs. INDRAMANI SAHOO AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE judgment debtor -petitioner assails the order dated 7 -1 -95 passed by the Second Court, Civil judge (Sr. Division) Cuttack in Execution Case No 4/87 refusing to entertain a petition for the purpose of dismissal of the execution case instituted by the opposite parties herein.

(2.) A brief reference to the facts would suffice. In the year 1971 Ac.0.54 decimals of land was acquired for Chitrotpala Flood Protection Embankment in village Uttarakula. The Land Acquisition Collector passed an award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act (in short, 'the Act') on 11 -12 -73. The claimant received the amount under protest and demanded higher compensation. Reference being made to the competent Civil Court award was enhanced on adjudication taxing the market price at Rs. 10000/ - per acre. The said award was passed on 19 -10 -85. State of Orissa preferred First Appeal No. 36/86 before this Court but the same was dismissed. The opposite parties levied Execution Case No. 4/87 and prayed for additional market value as contemplated under Section 23(1 -A) of the Act. Amendment as prayed for claiming the said entitlement was allowed by the executing Court despite serious objection raised by the State. As the objection was not accepted and amendment was allowed a Civil Revision was carried to this Court. While not interfering with the order allowing amendment direction was given to the State Government to file a calculation sheet in the executing Court with a further stipulation that the executing Court was to determine the benefits payable to the claimant. When such a calculation sheet was filed before the executing Court, the said Court held that the claimant was entitled to compensation under Section 23(1 -A) of the act. Treating such determination as an award under Section 26 of the Act First Appeal No. 207/91 was preferred. In the aforesaid First Appeal this Court held that the claimant was entitled to the statutory benefits as provided under Section 23(1 -A) of the Act. In pursuance of the direction contained in the First Appeal calculation sheet was filed and the calculation sheet submitted by the Decree -holder was accepted on 28.4.92 and direction was issued to pay the amount as per the said calculation. The State Government in compliance of the said order had made part payment.

(3.) TO appreciate the rival contentions a close scrutiny of the judgment passed in First Appeal No. 207/91 is necessary. It is appropriate to reproduce the relevant paragraphs of the said judgment. They read thus: