L.A.C. Vs. AVINDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals have been preferred by the State against the award passed by the learned Additional District Judge (hereinafter referred to as the Reference Court). All the three appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment as they were consolidated and tried together by the learned Reference Court.

(2.) THE basic grievance of the State is that the award includes within its ambit interest awarded to the claimants from the date of possession and not from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Learned Additional Advocate General submits that notification under Section 4 was issued subsequent to the taking over of the possession. She submits that in terms of the judgments passed by this Court in Narotam Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and others, 2002(3) Shim.L.C. 45 : 2003(2) Cur.L.J. (H.P.) F.B. 503 following the judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, 2002(1) SCC 142, no interest can be awarded for the period prior to the issuance of the notification under Section 4 of the Act. She also placed reliance under Section 4 of the Act. She also places reliance on the judgments of the Honble Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri and another v. Special Land Acquisition Officer and another, 2002(1) SCC 142 and R.L. Jain (D) by LRs. v. DDA and others, 2004(4) SCC 79, holding that the Act does not contemplate payment of any sum prior to issuance of the notification under Section 4(1) of the Act.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the respondents submits that although notification under Section 4 of the Act may have been issued subsequent to taking over of possession of the land, however, the claimants entitlement to receive rent and damages for use and occupation of the property prior to the date of acquisition cannot be denied by the State. He has placed reliance on judgment of the Honble Supreme Court in Land Acquisition Officer and Asstt. Commissioner and another v. Hemanagouda and others, 2005(12) SCC 443.