STATE OF HARYANA Vs. SUNEHARI DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision petition against the order dated 2.6.2001 passed by Additional District Judge, Hissar directing that the respondents are not held entitled to get interest on solatium, and additional amount and they can adjust the amount paid or deposited by the judgment- debtors as per general rule of adjustment i.e., firstly towards interest and costs and then towards the principal. Alongwith the petition, an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act has been filed as there was delay of 77 days in filing the revision petition.

(2.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the respondents very fairly and candidly made a statement that the respondents have no objection if the delay is condoned as the delay was the result of procedural delay of the office. So, in view of the statement made by the counsel for the respondents, the delay is condoned.

(3.) AFTER hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record that the case law cited at the bar, I am of the considered opinion that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order. The proposition whether the State is liable to pay interest on the amount awarded under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act has been settled in Sunder v. Union of India and others, 2001(4) RCR(Civil) 727 (SC) : (2001-3)129 PLR 860 (SC) wherein it has been held as under :