UNION OF INDIA Vs. HAKAM SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Faridkot, dated April 22, 1997.

(2.) To appreciate the controversy, certain facts need to be stated. The property of the respondents was acquired under the Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952. The Senior Sub Judge, Faridkot, was appointed as an Arbitrator for determining the compensation for the land acquired. By an award dated April 24, 1980, the Senior Sub Judge enhanced the compensation with solatium at fifteen per cent and interest at six per cent. The claimants filed the appeal against the said award. This Court held that the claimants are entitled to solatium at the rate of thirty per cent and interest at the rate of nine per cent for the first year and fifteen per cent per annum thereafter. The Union of India filed SLP No. 1780 of 1991 and Civil Appeal No. 3874 of 1992 in the Apex Court. The Apex Court held that the claimants are not entitled to solatium and interest. Meanwhile, the Union of India deposited a sum of Rs. 22,65,413.69 towards solatium and interest as per the decisions of this Court. The said amount had been withdrawn by the claimants under the order of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Faridkot. After the decision of the Supreme Court, the Union of India filed an application for refund of Rs. 22,65,413.69 deposited by the Union of India and withdrawn by the claimants along with interest from the date of withdrawal. While allowing the said application for refund of the amount under Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Faridkot, passed the following order on April 22, 1997, which is impugned in this revision:

(3.) The only question to be decided in this petition is, whether, the Union of India is entitled to interest from the date of withdrawal of the amount by the claimants to which they are not entitled in view of the decisions of the Apex Court. According to the respondents, the Apex Court, while setting aside the order of this Court, has not: awarded interest on the refund of the amount deposited by the Union of India and withdrawn by the claimants and, therefore, the Union of India is not entitled to recover any interest not the amount withdrawn by the claimants. The question involved is squarely covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Lucy Kochuvareed v. P. Mariaapa Gounder & Ors., wherein it has been held as follows :