JUDGMENT D.P. Wadhwa, J.
1. All these appeals have been filed by the Union of India. The challenge is not to the award of compensation but to the applicability of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the Act') as introduced in the Act by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (for short 'the Amending Act') which came into force on 24 September 1984 but the provisions afore said were nevertheless made applicable from 30 April 1982 when the bill of the Amending Act was introduced in the Parliament.
2. In R.F.A. 154/89 notifications under Sections 4, 6 and 17 were all issued on 19 April 1979 and it was staled that possession was taken perhaps some time in May 1979. The record does not show as to on which date the possession was taken. The award by the Collector was made on 1.8 August 1980 and judgment by the Additional District Judge on reference made under Section 18 of the Act was given on 29 October 1987. The learned Additional District Judge said that since the matter regarding interpretation of the three provisions of the Act as amended by the Amending Act was pending in the Supreme Court, the claimants should be entitled to further amount in terms of the judgment of the Supreme Court as and when delivered.
3. In R.F.As. 407/90, 527/90, 528/90, 529/90 and 589/90 the impugned order of the learned Additional District Judge is on an application filed under Section 28 of the Act as amended seeking enhancement of the amount of interest, solarium, etc. under Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. In all these five, appeals the award of the Collector and/or the judgment of the learned Additional District Judge on a reference made under Section 18 of the Act, was given in 1983 or in 1984 during the period 30 April 1982 and 24 September 1984. The learned Additional District Judge, therefore, modified the judgment delivered earlier and awarded additional amount under Section 23(1-A) at the rate of 12% per annum, solarium at the rate of 30% on the market value under Section 23(2) and further awarded interest under Section 28 of the Act at the rate of 9% per annum for one year from the date of taking possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum on the enhanced amount till payment.
4. Thus, in all these appeals the questions involved are about the payment of additional amount to the land owners in terms of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. These sections are as under :-
"Section 23(1-A) In addition to the market-value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market-value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4, Sub-section (1), in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.
Explanation. - In computing the period referred to in this sub-section, any period or periods during which the proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall be excluded. "
Section 23(2) "In addition to the market-value of the land, as above provided, the Court shall in every case award a sum of thirty per centum on such market-value, in consideration of the compulsory nature of the acquisition."
5. Section 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:
6. 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.
7. Section 30 of the Amending Act deals with transitional provisions and is as under:-
(1) The provisions of Sub-section (1-A) of Section 23 of the principal Act, as inserted by Clause (a) of Section 15 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to,-
(a) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the principal Act pending on the 30th day of April, 1982 [the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People], in which no award has been made by the Collector before that date;
(b) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the principal Act commenced after that date, whether or not an award has been made by the Collector before the date of commencement of this Act.
(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 in appeal against any such award under the provisions of the principal Act after the 30th day of April, 1982, [the dale of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People] and before the commencement of this Act.
(3) The provisions of Section 34 of the principal Act, as amended by Section 20 of this Act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to, -
(a) every case in which possession of any land acquired under the principal Act had been taken before the 30th day of April, 1982 [the date of introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill, 1982, in the House of the People], and the amount of compensation for such acquisition had not been paid or deposited under Section 31 of the principal Act until such date, with effect on and from that date; and
(b) every case in which such possession has been taken on or after that date but before the commencement of this Act without the amount of compensation having been paid or deposited under the said Section 31, with effect on and from the date of taking such possession."
8. All these provisions have been the subject-matter of decision by various judgments of the Supreme Court and one question arising out of the interpretation of these provisions has been referred by two judges Bench of the Supreme Court to a larger Bench. That judgment referring to larger Bench is Mir Fazeelath Husssain and Ors. v. Special Deputy Collector, Land Acquisition, Hyderabad, . In this case the possession of the land was taken on 24 June 1968 and one Judge took the view that the claimant would be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation at the rate of 6% per annum from 24 June 1968 up to 23 September 1984 and at 9% per annum from 24 September 1984 (the date when the Amending Act came into force) till the payment of such amount in the court. The other Judge, however, took the view that right from 24 June 1968, the date of taking possession, till payment of such amount was made in court, the claimant would be entitled to interest at the rate of 6% per annum. In this case neither the award nor the; reference under Section 18 of the Act was decided between 30 April 1982 and 24 September 1984. Rather the reference was decided by the court on 30 August 1972 much before the amendment. The High Court decided the appeal on 24 June 1974 also before the amendment and decision of the Supreme Court referring the question to larger Bench is dated 15 May 1992.
9. In Union of India and Anr. v. Raghubir Singh (dead) by LRs. etc., , a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that Section 30(2) of the Amending Act extended the benefit of the enhanced solarium (Section 23(2) of the Act) to cases where the award by the Collector or by the Court, on reference under Section 18 of the Act, was made between 30 April 1982 and 24 September 1984 or to appeals against such awards decided by the High Court and the Supreme Court whether the decisions of the High Court or the Supreme Court were rendered before 24 September 1984 or after that date.
10. As we have seen above, Section 30(2) of the Amending Act applies to the provisions of Sub-section (2) of Section 23 and Section 28 of the Act. Section 23(2) deals with award of solarium and Section 28 with payment of interest on excess compensation. Provisions of Section 28 of the Act were subject-matter of consideration of this Court in Raghbir Singh (deceased by L.Rs) and Ors. v. Union of India etc, , against which the appeal was heard by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, however, in appeal before it dealt only with award of solarium under Section 23(2) of the Act. This Court had observed as under :-
"The wordings of the section are clear. The theory of Section 28 is that the excess compensation awarded by the District Court or the High Court or the Supreme Court is in fact a sum which the Collector "ought to have awarded as compensation" and as such was payable at the date of the taking of the possession. Though determined in future by the Courts the "excess compensation" relates back to the date of taking possession of the owner's land. And it ought to be so. The Government cannot take the land as well as keep compensation with it. The taker of the land must pay interest on compensation for the delay. Therefore, the legislature has gone to the aid of the landowner and has made its intention quite clear by opening the section with the words: "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". Therefore if there is an excess between the amount awarded by the Collector and as determined by the Court on reference under Section 18 or on appeal by the High Court or on a further appeal by the Supreme Court, then such excess compensation shall carry interest not from the date when the excess is determined but from the date the Collector took possession of the owner's land. That interest is 9 per cent for the first year. After the expiry of the first year it is 15 per cent till the date of payment. "
11. It was stated that since judgment was reversed by the Supreme Court these observations cannot be relied upon by the claimants. We do not think that would be the correct approach and as we have noticed above the Supreme Court in Union of India and Anr. v. Raghubeer Singh (dead) by LRs. etc. was concerned only with the award of solarium under Section 23(2) and the question of interest under Section 28 of the Act was left untouched. Even otherwise we see no reasons to differ with the observations aforesaid by a Bench of this Court.
12. In Union of India and Anr. etc.etc. v. Zora Singh etc etc, , the Supreme Court was concerned with the provisions of Section 23(1-A) of the Act read with Section 30(1)(a) of the Amending Act. The court overruled its earlier decision in Union of India and Ors. v. Flip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama, JT 1989 (4) S.C. 529, and observed as under :-
"We find that on the plain language of Section 23(1-A) itself, which we have set out earlier, the duty was cast on the Court to award an additional amount calculated as prescribed therein which would mean that it is directed to be awarded by the court, namely, the Reference Court, in all cases which are pending before that court on September 1, 1984. Sub-section (1)(a) of Section 30 undoubtedly lays down that the provisions of Section 23(1-A) of the Act are also made applicable to all proceedings for the acquisition of any land under the said Act pending on April 30, 1982, where no award had been made by the Collector before that date. At first glance this would appear to suggest that the additional amount referred to in Section 23(1-A) could not be awarded before April 30, 1982. But this provision cannot be allowed to cut down the benefits available to the claimants on a plain reading of Section 23(1-A). This is clear from the use of the word "also" in the opening part of Section 30(1). In our opinion, the view taken by the Bench comprising two learned Judges of this Court in that case cannot be accepted as correct as it is too narrow and unduly cuts down the operation of the benefit conferred under the plain language of Section 23(1-A) of the said Act."
13. Considering the provisions of the Act as amended by the Amending Act and the law as propounded by the Supreme Court as well as this Court we are of the opinion that in all these matters claimants are entitled to in addition to market value of the land (1) an amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of publication of the notification under Section 4(1) in respect of such land to the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land whichever is earlier [Section 23(1-A)]; (2) in addition to the market value of the land as above provided, 30% on such market value in consideration of compulsory nature of acquisition (Section23(2)]; and (3) interest 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 amount as might have been awarded by the Additional District Judge on a reference under Section 18 of the Act over and above that given by the Collector in his award under Section 11 of the Act. Further to this, if such excess or any part thereof is paid into court after the date of expiry of period of one year from the date on which possession is taken, interest at the rate of 15% per annum from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of such excess or part thereof which had not been paid into court before the date of such expiry [Section 28]. Under this section, however, payment is to be made if so directed by the Court of the District Judge (or the Additional District Judge as the case may be).
14. In this view of the matter all these appeals fail and are dismissed, There will be, however, no order as to costs.