Once the land value is fixed by the Court, it refers
to the value of the land as per the Award passed by the
Collector. That should carry all eligible statutory
benefits. It appears that in the case before us,
statutory benefits have been denied for a short period on
the ground that the proceedings initiated at the instance
of the appellants, remained stayed before the Reference
Court. To quote from Paragraph-4 of the impugned
judgment:
“Learned Counsel for the appellant,
however, had submitted that the learned
trial court was not justified in declining
the relief of interest on the enhanced
compensation for the period during which
the reference proceedings had remained
stayed sine die and that relief at least
should be given by this Court. However,
this prayer of the appellant cannot be
accepted since he himself had got his
reference proceedings before the trial
Court stayed sine die and the Government
cannot be burdened with the liability of
interest for the delay in disposal of the
reference proceedings caused by the
appellant himself.”
3. We fail to understand how the appellants could be
denied the statutory benefits available under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Act”) in respect of the value of this land fixed, merely
because there was a period of stay operating, may be in a
proceeding at the instance of the appellants. Those are
not relevant considerations or factors at all for the
purpose of grant of statutory benefits available to a
person, whose land has been acquired in terms of Section
28 of the Act. Section 28 reads as under:
“28. Collector may be directed to pay
interest on excess compensation. 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 award of the Court may
direct that the Collector shall pay
interest on such excess at the rate of
nine per centum per annum from the date
on which he took possession of the land
to the date of payment of such excess
into Court:
Provided that the award of the Court may
also direct that where such excess or
any part thereof is paid into 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 fifteen per centum per annum
shall be payable from the date of expiry
of the said period of one year on the
amount of such excess or part thereof
which has not been paid into Court
before the date of such expiry.”
4. There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on
whatever account under Section 28 of the Act. The only
reference is to the date of dispossession. Liability to
pay interest starts to run from that date. Therefore,
these appeals are allowed. It is directed that the
appellants shall be entitled to interest for the
compensation, as per Section 28 r/w Section 23(1A), in
respect of the land acquired from the appellants, on
value at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha for the
period of stay also, i.e., from 24.04.1997 to 27.09.2001.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO 11177 OF 2011
RATTI RAM
V
UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
Dated:February 17, 2016.
Citation: 2016(5) ALLMR471 SC
1. In land acquisition proceedings pertaining to Award
No. 79 of 1982-1983 in respect of the land belonging to
the appellants, this Court finally fixed the land value
at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha, in the Judgment
dated 03.08.2004 in Delhi Development Authority v. Bali
Ram Sharma and Other.(2004) 6 SCC 533
2. Once the land value is fixed by the Court, it refers
to the value of the land as per the Award passed by the
Collector. That should carry all eligible statutory
benefits. It appears that in the case before us,
statutory benefits have been denied for a short period on
the ground that the proceedings initiated at the instance
of the appellants, remained stayed before the Reference
Court. To quote from Paragraph-4 of the impugned
judgment:
“Learned Counsel for the appellant,
however, had submitted that the learned
trial court was not justified in declining
the relief of interest on the enhanced
compensation for the period during which
the reference proceedings had remained
stayed sine die and that relief at least
should be given by this Court. However,
this prayer of the appellant cannot be
accepted since he himself had got his
reference proceedings before the trial
Court stayed sine die and the Government
cannot be burdened with the liability of
interest for the delay in disposal of the
reference proceedings caused by the
appellant himself.”
3. We fail to understand how the appellants could be
denied the statutory benefits available under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Act”) in respect of the value of this land fixed, merely
because there was a period of stay operating, may be in a
proceeding at the instance of the appellants. Those are
not relevant considerations or factors at all for the
purpose of grant of statutory benefits available to a
person, whose land has been acquired in terms of Section
28 of the Act. Section 28 reads as under:
“28. Collector may be directed to pay
interest on excess compensation. 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 award of the Court may
direct that the Collector shall pay
interest on such excess at the rate of
nine per centum per annum from the date
on which he took possession of the land
to the date of payment of such excess
into Court:
Provided that the award of the Court may
also direct that where such excess or
any part thereof is paid into 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 fifteen per centum per annum
shall be payable from the date of expiry
of the said period of one year on the
amount of such excess or part thereof
which has not been paid into Court
before the date of such expiry.”
4. There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on
whatever account under Section 28 of the Act. The only
reference is to the date of dispossession. Liability to
pay interest starts to run from that date. Therefore,
these appeals are allowed. It is directed that the
appellants shall be entitled to interest for the
compensation, as per Section 28 r/w Section 23(1A), in
respect of the land acquired from the appellants, on
value at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha for the
period of stay also, i.e., from 24.04.1997 to 27.09.2001.
5. We direct the Delhi Development Authority to compute
the amounts as above and deposit the same before the
Executing Court within a period of four weeks from today
which shall disburse the amounts to the appellants in
accordance with law.
6. There shall be no order as to costs.
...............J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
...............J.
[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]
New Delhi;
February 17, 2016.
Print Page
to the value of the land as per the Award passed by the
Collector. That should carry all eligible statutory
benefits. It appears that in the case before us,
statutory benefits have been denied for a short period on
the ground that the proceedings initiated at the instance
of the appellants, remained stayed before the Reference
Court. To quote from Paragraph-4 of the impugned
judgment:
“Learned Counsel for the appellant,
however, had submitted that the learned
trial court was not justified in declining
the relief of interest on the enhanced
compensation for the period during which
the reference proceedings had remained
stayed sine die and that relief at least
should be given by this Court. However,
this prayer of the appellant cannot be
accepted since he himself had got his
reference proceedings before the trial
Court stayed sine die and the Government
cannot be burdened with the liability of
interest for the delay in disposal of the
reference proceedings caused by the
appellant himself.”
3. We fail to understand how the appellants could be
denied the statutory benefits available under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Act”) in respect of the value of this land fixed, merely
because there was a period of stay operating, may be in a
proceeding at the instance of the appellants. Those are
not relevant considerations or factors at all for the
purpose of grant of statutory benefits available to a
person, whose land has been acquired in terms of Section
28 of the Act. Section 28 reads as under:
“28. Collector may be directed to pay
interest on excess compensation. 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 award of the Court may
direct that the Collector shall pay
interest on such excess at the rate of
nine per centum per annum from the date
on which he took possession of the land
to the date of payment of such excess
into Court:
Provided that the award of the Court may
also direct that where such excess or
any part thereof is paid into 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 fifteen per centum per annum
shall be payable from the date of expiry
of the said period of one year on the
amount of such excess or part thereof
which has not been paid into Court
before the date of such expiry.”
4. There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on
whatever account under Section 28 of the Act. The only
reference is to the date of dispossession. Liability to
pay interest starts to run from that date. Therefore,
these appeals are allowed. It is directed that the
appellants shall be entitled to interest for the
compensation, as per Section 28 r/w Section 23(1A), in
respect of the land acquired from the appellants, on
value at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha for the
period of stay also, i.e., from 24.04.1997 to 27.09.2001.
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO 11177 OF 2011
RATTI RAM
V
UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
Dated:February 17, 2016.
Citation: 2016(5) ALLMR471 SC
1. In land acquisition proceedings pertaining to Award
No. 79 of 1982-1983 in respect of the land belonging to
the appellants, this Court finally fixed the land value
at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha, in the Judgment
dated 03.08.2004 in Delhi Development Authority v. Bali
Ram Sharma and Other.(2004) 6 SCC 533
2. Once the land value is fixed by the Court, it refers
to the value of the land as per the Award passed by the
Collector. That should carry all eligible statutory
benefits. It appears that in the case before us,
statutory benefits have been denied for a short period on
the ground that the proceedings initiated at the instance
of the appellants, remained stayed before the Reference
Court. To quote from Paragraph-4 of the impugned
judgment:
“Learned Counsel for the appellant,
however, had submitted that the learned
trial court was not justified in declining
the relief of interest on the enhanced
compensation for the period during which
the reference proceedings had remained
stayed sine die and that relief at least
should be given by this Court. However,
this prayer of the appellant cannot be
accepted since he himself had got his
reference proceedings before the trial
Court stayed sine die and the Government
cannot be burdened with the liability of
interest for the delay in disposal of the
reference proceedings caused by the
appellant himself.”
3. We fail to understand how the appellants could be
denied the statutory benefits available under the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the
Act”) in respect of the value of this land fixed, merely
because there was a period of stay operating, may be in a
proceeding at the instance of the appellants. Those are
not relevant considerations or factors at all for the
purpose of grant of statutory benefits available to a
person, whose land has been acquired in terms of Section
28 of the Act. Section 28 reads as under:
“28. Collector may be directed to pay
interest on excess compensation. 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 award of the Court may
direct that the Collector shall pay
interest on such excess at the rate of
nine per centum per annum from the date
on which he took possession of the land
to the date of payment of such excess
into Court:
Provided that the award of the Court may
also direct that where such excess or
any part thereof is paid into 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 fifteen per centum per annum
shall be payable from the date of expiry
of the said period of one year on the
amount of such excess or part thereof
which has not been paid into Court
before the date of such expiry.”
4. There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on
whatever account under Section 28 of the Act. The only
reference is to the date of dispossession. Liability to
pay interest starts to run from that date. Therefore,
these appeals are allowed. It is directed that the
appellants shall be entitled to interest for the
compensation, as per Section 28 r/w Section 23(1A), in
respect of the land acquired from the appellants, on
value at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha for the
period of stay also, i.e., from 24.04.1997 to 27.09.2001.
5. We direct the Delhi Development Authority to compute
the amounts as above and deposit the same before the
Executing Court within a period of four weeks from today
which shall disburse the amounts to the appellants in
accordance with law.
6. There shall be no order as to costs.
...............J.
[KURIAN JOSEPH]
...............J.
[ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN]
New Delhi;
February 17, 2016.
No comments:
Post a Comment