Hans Raj vs Punjab State

N.K. Kapoor, J.

This judgment shall dispose of letters patent appeals 436 and 437 of 1980 as these arise out of the same judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 10.3.1980.

Government vide notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'') dated 20.2.1976 sought acquisition of land for setting up an Industrial Focal Point at Jalandhar. Land Acquisition Collector applied the belting and awarded the compensation as :

First belt

Rs. 210/ per marla;

Second belt

Rs. 165/ per marla;

Third belt

Rs. 150/ per marla;

Fourth belt

Rs. 105/ per marla;

Fifth belt

Rs. 90/ per marla;

Feeling dissatisfied, reference was filed under Section 18 of the Act and the Additional District Judge vide judgment dated 31.1.1979 enhanced the amount of compensation payable to the tenants i.e. Rs. 500/ per marla for the first belt and Rs. 300/ per marla for the second belt.

Still dissatisfied with the amount of compensation, the claimants preferred regular first appeal and the learned Single Judge on considering the matter on the basis of its location and the other evidence adduced by the parties, determined the compensation to be paid for the land acquired at a flat rate of Rs. 210/ per marla. In addition thereto, the claimants were held entitled to solatium and interest as per the provisions of the Act.

The learned counsel for the appellant at the outset drew our attention to an earlier decision of this Court in Raj Kumar and others v. Punjab State and another, 1990(1) R.R.R. 444, R.F.A. No. 710 of 1981 pertaining to the same acquisition of land wherein the learned Single Judge awarded compensation of all types of lands to the claimants at the flat rate of Rs. 400/ per marla. Besides, it, the Court granted solatium at the rate of 30% per annum and interest as per provisions of the Act. Counsel further argued that as the earlier decision has attained finality, appellant deserves to be awarded compensation at the same rate.

Learned Advocate General, Punjab in all fairness concedes that matter is squarely covered by the earlier decision in Raj Kumar''s case (supra) and is to be allowed in the same terms but with a clarification i.e. as regards the awarding of interest at the rate of 12% per annum over and above the compensation amount, same is not permissible as Section 23(1A) was inserted vide Act No. 68 of 1984 and so would not govern the present case as in the instant case Section 4 notification is dated 20.2.1976 whereas the award of the Land Acquisition Collector was made on 19.11.1976.

We find merit in this submission of the learned Advocate General. Thus, we allow appeals, enhance the compensation to be paid to the appellants i.e. Rs. 400/ per marla. In addition to the amount of compensation appellants will be entitled to solatium at the rate of 30% over and above the compensation amount and will also be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the amount of compensation for the first year from the date of delivery of possession and at the rate of 15% per annum for the subsequent years. Appellants, however, will not be entitled to claim interest under Section 23(1A) of the Act.