1994 JTR(SC) 1263
1994 3 CurCC(SC) 773 ; 1995 1 CurLJ 201 ; 1995 2 RRR 289 ; 1994 5 Scale 329 ; 1995 1 SCC 383 ; 1994 Supp6 SCR 450 ; 1995 1 UJ 256
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BEFORE K. RAMASWAMY AND N. VENKATACHALA, JJ.
STATE OF PUNJAB
Versus
AVTAR SINGH AND OTHERS
Civil Appeal No. 9462 of 1994{From the Judgment and Order dated 20-7-1987 of the Punjab & Haryana High Court in R.A. No. 23-CII/87 D-B.}
Decided on 9-12-1994
Advocates appeared:
Ranbir Yadav and G.K. Bansal, Advocates, for the Appellant;
A.T.M. Sampath and Ms S. Bagga, Advocates, for the Respondents.
Act Referred :LAND ACQUISITION ACT : S.2, S.28, S.23(1)(a)
(A) The Land Acquisition Act provisions operative in this case involve Section 2 defining acquisition scope, Section 28 governing interest and solatium rates, and Section 23(1)(a) addressing compensation determination. The notification under Section 4 was published in 1946 for para-military purposes, and a subsequent notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in 1965. The amendment Act (68 of 1984) sought to enhance solatium and interest rates, but the Court held that these enhancements do not apply to awards made prior to the amendment's introduction. The enhancement benefits under Section 23(2) and proviso to Section 28 are not available to an award finalized on 5-3-1973, nor do they apply to pending appeals. Consequently, the interest payable is governed by the original Principal Act provisions, limited to 6% from the date of award, and solatium remains at 15%. The amendment's benefits apply only to acquisitions notified after 30-4-1982, leaving pre-amendment awards untouched.
(B) Key legal principles include the non-retrospective application of acquisition amendment laws, the fixed rates of solatium and interest under the Principal Act, and the limitation of benefits to acquisitions effected after the amendment's commencement date.
Facts of the case:
Land measuring 54 kanals 11 marlas was requisitioned in 1946 for para-military purposes. A notification under Section 4 was issued in 1965. Compensation was awarded in 1972 and enhanced in 1973. The High Court had previously modified the decree to grant enhanced solatium and interest rates under the 1984 Amendment Act. A review petition was dismissed, leading to this special leave appeal.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the 1984 Amendment Act does not apply to awards made before its introduction and that the enhancement provisions cannot be applied retrospectively to the 1973 award. The High Court's order granting higher solatium and interest rates was therefore set aside.
Issues:
Whether the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, can be applied to an award made in 1973, and what rates of solatium and interest are payable under the Principal Act.
Ratio Decidendi:
The Amendment Act is not retrospective and cannot alter the rates of solatium and interest for pre-amendment awards. Only the original statutory rates under the Principal Act apply to awards concluded before the amendment's commencement.
Result:
The appeal is allowed. The claimants are entitled to 15% solatium and 6% interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of the award, 25-1-1972, instead of the higher rates granted by the High Court.
(A) The Land Acquisition Act provisions operative in this case involve Section 2 defining acquisition scope, Section 28 governing interest and solatium rates, and Section 23(1)(a) addressing compensation determination. The notification under Section 4 was published in 1946 for para-military purposes, and a subsequent notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published in 1965. The amendment Act (68 of 1984) sought to enhance solatium and interest rates, but the Court held that these enhancements do not apply to awards made prior to the amendment's introduction. The enhancement benefits under Section 23(2) and proviso to Section 28 are not available to an award finalized on 5-3-1973, nor do they apply to pending appeals. Consequently, the interest payable is governed by the original Principal Act provisions, limited to 6% from the date of award, and solatium remains at 15%. The amendment's benefits apply only to acquisitions notified after 30-4-1982, leaving pre-amendment awards untouched.
(B) Key legal principles include the non-retrospective application of acquisition amendment laws, the fixed rates of solatium and interest under the Principal Act, and the limitation of benefits to acquisitions effected after the amendment's commencement date.
Facts of the case:
Land measuring 54 kanals 11 marlas was requisitioned in 1946 for para-military purposes. A notification under Section 4 was issued in 1965. Compensation was awarded in 1972 and enhanced in 1973. The High Court had previously modified the decree to grant enhanced solatium and interest rates under the 1984 Amendment Act. A review petition was dismissed, leading to this special leave appeal.
Findings of Court:
The Court found that the 1984 Amendment Act does not apply to awards made before its introduction and that the enhancement provisions cannot be applied retrospectively to the 1973 award. The High Court's order granting higher solatium and interest rates was therefore set aside.
Issues:
Whether the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984, can be applied to an award made in 1973, and what rates of solatium and interest are payable under the Principal Act.
Ratio Decidendi:
The Amendment Act is not retrospective and cannot alter the rates of solatium and interest for pre-amendment awards. Only the original statutory rates under the Principal Act apply to awards concluded before the amendment's commencement.
Result:
The appeal is allowed. The claimants are entitled to 15% solatium and 6% interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of the award, 25-1-1972, instead of the higher rates granted by the High Court.
A.T.M.SAMPATH, G.K.BANSAL, Ranbir Yadav, S.Baggar
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard counsel for the parties.
3. Originally land admeasuring 54 kanals 11 marlas was requisitioned by the District Magistrate, Amritsar by a notification published on 9-9-1946 for para-military purposes. Subsequently, notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was published by the State Government on 30-6-1965. The arbitrator awarded the compensation on 25-1-1972. On reference, compensation was enhanced to Rs 30 per square yard by the award dated 5-3-1973 together with solatium at 15% and interest at 12% from the date of acquisition till payment was made on behalf of the State. The claimants FAO No. 76 of 1973 was disposed of by the High Court on 17-11-1982. Subsequently, an application was made under Sections 152 and 151 of CPC requesting the High Court to amend the decree applying the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (68 of 1984). The High Court allowed CM No. 2911-C of 1986 on 22-7-1986 granting the benefits of 30% solatium instead of 15% solatium and also interest on 9% for one year from the date of taking possession and thereafter @ 15% after the expiry of one year till date of payment or deposit whichever is earlier. The order in first appeal is accordingly modified. A review petition filed was also dismissed. Thus this appeal by special leave.
4. It is now settled law by this Court in Union of India v. Raghubir Singh{(1989) 2 SCC 754} and K.S. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala{(1994) 5 SCC 593} the LA Amendment Act 68 of 1984 does not apply to an award made by the civil court prior to introduction of the LA Amendment Bill. Section 28 proviso and Section 23(2) as amended by Act 68 of 1984 would apply to an award made by the Collector or civil court between 30-4-1982 to 24-9-1984 and have no application to pending appeals in the High Court or Supreme Court. Equally Section 23(1-A) does not apply to a notification under Section 4(1) published prior to 30-4-1982. The Additional District Judge made an award in this case on 5-3-1973. The claimants are, therefore, not entitled to the payment of solatium at 30% and interest at 9% and 15% respectively under Section 23(2) of the Act and proviso to Section 28 of the Act on the enhanced compensation. Equally under Section 28 of the Principal Act the claimant was entitled to only 6% interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of taking possession. In this case since lands were initially requisitioned and rent was paid till date of acquisition, the claimants are entitled to interest only from the date of award by the Collector. The order of the High Court dated 22-7-1986 is set aside, instead the respondents-claimants are entitled to 15% solatium on the enhanced compensation and interest at 6% on the enhanced compensation from the date of the award i.e. 25-1-1972. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
For Citation: (1995) 1 SCC 383