IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
CRP.No. 910 of 2007()
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Petitioner
Vs
1. V.VELAPPAN NAIR, GRAMATHIL VEEDU,
... Respondent
2. LALITHAKUMARI,GRAMATHIL VEEDU,
3. LALITHAKUMARI,GRAMATHIL VEEDU,
4. GOPAKUMAR,GRAMATHIL VEEDU,
5. ADDL.R.5. G.SANTHAKUMARI,AGED 35,
6. V.S.ARYA, AGED 13 (MINOR),
7. V.S.AKHIL, AGED 9 (MINOR),
For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR
Dated :25/06/2008
O R D E R
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J.
-------------------------------
C.R.P.No.910 of 2007
-------------------------------
Dated this the 25th June, 2008.
O R D E R
The State is challenging the order of the Executing
Court (Sub Court, Neyyattinkara) in E.P.No.106/2000 in L.A.R.No.3 of
1997, directing the State to deposit Rs.19,453.72, holding that the
State is liable to pay interest on solatium also. Though notice was
served on the respondents, they did not appear.
2. The learned Government Pleader was heard.
3. The Constitution Bench of Apex Court in Gurpreet
Singh v. Union of India (2006 (8) SCC 457), held that claimants are
entitled to get interest on the enhanced compensation including
solatium, but as interest on solatium is payable based on Sundar v.
Union of India (2001 (7) SCC 211), interest is payable only from
that the date of that judgment. The learned Government Pleader
pointed out that the order of the Executing Court does not show as to
from which date interest on solatium was calculated and also the
mode by which the credit of the deposit made by the State was
CRP.No.910/2007
2
accounted. In such circumstances, the order dated, 25.2.2006, is
quashed. The learned Sub Judge is directed to consider the question
afresh and decide the actual amount, if any, payable by the State,
taking into consideration the Law as laid down by the Apex Court in
Gurpreet Singh’s case.
The writ petition is disposed as above.
M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,
JUDGE
nj.
