SUKOMAL BAUL Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal under Clause 10 of the letters patent Is directed against the order dated 21.11.1994 passed by the learned single Judge modifying the decree passed in F.A. No. 24 of 1986(R) under the Land Acquisition Act. It appears that the land measuring 1.46 acres belonging to the claimants/appellants were acquired in the year 1959 -1960 and the valuation of the said land was determined by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs. 4,672/ - taking into consideration the land of Tanr 2. The appellants being dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation, made objection which resulted a reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. The learned Special Judge, Land Acquisition, disposed of the reference case enhancing the valuation of the land at the rate of Rs. 18,000/ - per acre in terms of the judgment dated 21.6.1984 and accordingly the said Court made an award dated 1.7.1984. The Court also awarded 15% additional compensation on the increased amount under Section 23 of the said Act and further interest at the rate of 6% under Section 28 of the said Act. In the meantime, the Land Acquisition Act was amended and on 6.8.1985 the appellants filed an application claiming solatium and other benefits which was also disallowed by the Land Acquisition Judge by order dated 31.1.1986.

(2.) BEING aggrieved -by the said order the appellants preferred appeal before this Court being F.A. No. 24 of 1986 (R). The learned single Judge, by judgment dated 15th May, 1992, allowed the appeal and modified the award holding that the appellants are entitled for enhanced solatium at the rate of 30% in lieu of 15% as additional compensation on the increased amount, besides interest at the rate of 9% in lieu of 6% under Section 23 of the Act. In the concluding portion of the judgment the learned single Judge held that the appellants would be entitled to get the interest at the rate of 12%, in case the compensation amount is not deposited, then they would be entitled to get interest at the rate of 15% per annum. The said judgment passed by the learned single Judge is not impugned by filing any appeal before this Court or the Supreme Court.

(3.) NOW , the learned Counsel appearing for the appellants submits that there Is some calculation mistake in the interest. We are afraid such mistake, if any, can be rectified by the Court exercising letters patent jurisdiction to find out whether there is calculation mistake in the interest or not.