BIKRAM SINGH Vs. HARDIAL SINGH SIDHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Award under the Land Acquisition Act was given by the Collector on 30th June, 1980, whereas possession of the land acquired had already been taken on 1st January, 1980. Reference under Section 18 against the said award is said to be pending before the District Judge concerned. However, the petitioners-claimants wanted payment of the compensation as awarded by the Collector. That application was contested on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana. However, the learned Additional District Judge vide order dated 17th April, 1982, ordered the payment of the amount to the claimants subject to certain conditions. According to the said order, the cheque for the amount of Rs. 1,30,500/- was to be given to Bikram Singh, his wife Nirmaljit Kaur and son Harjinder Singh in equal shares without taking any security from them. Another sum of Rs. 1,09,427.43 P. representing the share of Anup Inder Singh minor was to be deposited in the State Bank of India, Civil Lines, Ludhiana, or Chandigarh. The amount of Rs. 1,97,782.30 P. was to be paid to the said three applicants in equal shares after taking bank guarantee from them undertaking that they shall refund the amount if and when required by the Court. This order was challenged in this Court by way of Civil Revision, which was decided on 4th August, 1982 whereby the said order was quashed and it was directed that the claimants shall be paid the amount of compensation forthwith according to award.

(2.) The claimants have now again applied for a direction to the Corporation to comply with the order of the High Court and also claimed interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum from the date of the possession till payment. Admittedly, the amount of compensation was deposited on 18th January, 1982 in the Court by the Corporation and therein the interest was calculated upto that date. The contention on behalf of the claimants was that they were entitled to the interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum upto the date of payment i.e. 7th August, 1982. The learned Additional District Judge found that the claim for interest beyond 18th January, 1982 was not tenable because the deposit of the amount in Court stopped the liability of the Municipal Corporation to pay interest on the aforesaid amount after that date. Dissatisfied with the same, the claimants have filed this petition in this Court.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that since the amount of compensation was not paid upto 7th August, 1982, though deposited in Court on 18th January, 1982 and that the payment could not be given because it was objected on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, they were entitled to the interests upto the date of payment i.e. 7th August, 1982. In support of this contention, he referred to Uttar Pradesh Government v. H.S. Gupta, 1957 AIR(SC) 202. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the Municipal Corporation contended that in any case the amount of Rs. 1,30,500/- was available to the claimants without taking any security from them and, therefore, on that amount at least they could not claim any interest after the date of deposit i.e. 18th January, 1982. Similarly, as regards the amount of Rs. 1,09,427. 43P, it was to be deposited in the State Bank of India being the minor's share and on that amount also the question of future payment did not arise.