PETITIONER: K.S. PARIPOORNAN (II) Vs. RESPONDENT: STATE OF KERLA DATE OF JUDGMENT20/10/1994 BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BHARUCHA S.P. (J) MUKHERJEE M.K. (J) CITATION: 1995 AIR 581 1995 SCC (1) 367 1994 SCALE (4)951 ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT:
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Notification under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Land
Acquisition Act, 1961 (Act 21 of 1962) was published in the
State Gazette on 21-3-1979. The Collector under Section 11
thereof passed his award on 30-12-1980. Thereafter,
possession of some land was taken on 15-1-1981 and the
balance land on 13-3-1981. The compensation was deposited
on 10-8-1981. On a reference under Section 18 the civil
court enhanced the compensation at Rs 5000 per cent in its
award and decree dated 28-2-1985. The enhanced compensation
was deposited on 20-10-1986 and 3-12-1986 respectively. The
High Court on appeal, while confirming the enhanced
compensation granted by the civil court disallowed interest
under Sections 28 and 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act,
as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act (68 of
1984), for short “the Amendment Act”. By operation of the
Amendment Act, which has come into force on 24-9-1984, the
Kerala Act was repealed and thereby Central Act 1 of 1894
became applicable as amended by the Amendment Act. Section
15(b) and Section 18 of the Amendment Act amended Section 28
and Section 23(2) of the Central Act 1 of 1894. The High
Court, relying upon sub-section (2) of Section 30 of the
transitory provisions of the Amendment Act has held that
since the Award was made prior to the date the Amendment Act
had come into force, the appellant is entitled to the
interest under Section 30 of the Kerala Act at the rate of
4%. The question, therefore, is whether the appellant is
entitled to the enhanced interest as envisaged under Section
28 as amended under Section 18 of the Amendment Act.
3. It is contended for the State by Shri A.S. Nambiar, the
learned Senior Counsel that in Union of India v. Raghubir
Singh1 this Court had given restricted interpretation to
Section 30(2) of the transitory provisions holding that only
if the award has been made between 30-4-1982 and 24-9-1984,
would the claimant be entitled to the benefit of the
enhanced solatium under Section 23(2) of the Principal Act.
On the parity of the ratio therein by operation of sub-
section (2) of Section 30 of the transitory provisions of
the Amendment Act which includes Section 28 also, the ratio
therein would equally be applicable to the facts of these
cases. Since the award was made by the Court after the
Amendment Act had come into force, the appellant is not
entitled to the enhanced interest under the amended Section
28 of the Principal Act. We are unable to agree with the
learned counsel. Section 30(2) reads :
” 30. (2) The provisions of sub-section (2) of
Section 23 and Section 28 of the Principal
Act, as amended by clause (b) of Section 15
and Section 18 of this Act respectively, shall
apply, and shall be deemed to have applied,
also to, and in relation to, any award made by
the Collector or Court or to any order passed
by the High Court or Supreme Court on appeal
against any such award under the provisions of
the Principal Act
1 (1989) 2 SCC 754
370
after the 30th day of April, 1982 [the date of
introduction of the Land Acquisition
(Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the
People] and before the commencement of this
Act.”
This Court while noticing the effect of the amendment in
sub-section (2) of Section 30 in paragraph 31 considered the
effect thereof thus: (SCC pp. 779-780)
“31. In construing Section 30(2), it is just
as well to be clear that the award made by the
Collector referred to here is the award made
by the Collector under Section 11 of the
parent Act, and the award made by the Court is
the award made by the Principal Civil Court of
Original Jurisdiction under Section 23 of the
parent Act on a reference made to it by the
Collector under Section 19 of the parent Act.
There can be no doubt that the benefit of the
enhanced solatium is intended by Section 30(2)
in respect of an award made by the Collector
between April 30, 1982 and September 24, 1984.
Likewise the benefit of the enhanced solatiu
m
is extended by Section 30(2) to the case of an
award made by the Court between April 30, 1982
and September 24, 1984, even though it be upon
reference from an award made before April 30,
1982.”
4. This Court thereby clearly held that even in the
pending reference made before 30-4-1982, if the civil court
makes an award between 30-4-1982 and 24-9-1984, Section
30(2) gets attracted and thereby the enhanced solatium was
available to the claimants. Since Section 30(2) deals with
both the amendments to Section 23(2) and Section 28 of the
Principal Act by Section 15(b) and Section 18, respectively,
of the Amendment Act by parity of the reasoning the same
ratio applies to the awards made by the civil court between
those dates. The conflict of decisions as to whether
Section 23(2) as amended by Section 15(b) of the Amendment
Act through Section 30(2) of the transitory provisions would
be applicable to the pending appeals in the High Court and
the Supreme Court was resolved in Raghubir Singh case 1 by
the Constitution Bench holding that the award of the
Collector or the court made between 13-4-1982 and 24-9-1984
would alone get attracted to Section 30(2) of the transitory
provision. The restricted interpretation should not be
understood to mean that Section 23(2) would not apply to the
award of the civil court pending at the time when the Act
came into force or thereafter. In this case, admittedly the
award of the civil court was made after the Act had come
into force, namely, 28-2-1985.
5. Therefore, if the sum which, in the opinion of the
court, the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation,
is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as
compensation, the court shall direct the Collector to pay
interest on such excess at the rate of 9% per annum from the
date on which the Collector took possession of the land to
the date of payment of such excess into the court. By
operation of the proviso, if such excess or any part thereof
is paid into the court after the date of expiry of a period
of one year from the date on which possession is taken,
interest at the rate of 15% per annum shall be payable from
the date of expiry of the said period of one
371
year on the amount of such excess or part thereof which has
not been paid into the court before the date of such expiry.
Accordingly, the appellant is entitled to the enhanced
interest @ 9% from the date of taking possession, namely,
15-1-1981 and 11-3-1981 respectively for one year and
thereafter @ 15% till the date of the deposit made by the
Collector. Admittedly, the deposit of the enhanced
compensation was made on 20-10-1986 and 3-121986.
Therefore, the interest shall be calculated at the enhanced
rates for the aforesaid period.
6. The question relating to the payment of 12% additional
compensation under Section 23(1-A) over the excess
compensation has already been covered by the Constitution
Bench judgment of this Court in K.S. Paripoornan (1) v.
State of Kerala2. Therefore, the appellant is not entitled
to this benefit as the Collector made the award prior to the
date of the Amendment Act came into force.
7. The appeals are accordingly allowed in part but in the
circumstances, the parties are directed to bear their own
costs.
372