Supreme Court of India
STATE OF KERALA AND ANR. versus BETTY W/O L.J. MANI AND ANR.
- Decided
- 17 January 1995
- Judges listed
- K. RAMASWAMY, SUJATA V. MANOHAR
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Citations
- Official
- [1995] 1 S.C.R. 357 · 1995 INSC 49
Cited by
We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.
Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.
The Court's text
Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. The Court did not number this judgment's paragraphs, so they are listed by page. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.
A notification under s.3 of the Kerala Land Acquisition Act, 1961, equivalent to s.4(1) of the Central Act was published on September 10, 1974. The possession of the land was taken on March 20, 1977, obviously :tfter making the award. On reference, the Subordinate Judge enhanced the -compensation by his award and decree dated March 21, 1980. While dismissing the appeal of the State, the High Court by its judgment and decree dated January 14, 1988 applied the Amendment Act 68 of 1984 and granted that ·statutory benefits under s.23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended in Act 68 of 1984. Thus this appeal by special leave confining to the 1uestion of applicability of the statutory benefits under Act 68 of 1984.
p. 358, margin C
It would be seen that the court under s.23(1) while enhancing the compensation has been given power under s.23(1-A) or 23(2), on an application, to award the statutory benefits, in addition to the enhanced compensation. So, on the application made by the claimant, the court would not get jurisdiction to apply the amended Act 68/1984 except when it has enhanced the compensation. Even otherwise, it would apply only if proceedings were pending either before the Land Acquisition Officer or before the civil court before the date when the Bill was introduced on 30.4.82 or the Act came into force, i.e. 24.9.84. Then only the statutory benefits would be given on the enhanced compensation and not otherwise.
p. 358, margin E
Sri. G. Vishvanath Iyer, learned senior counsel for the claimants relied upon sub-s. (3) of s.30 of the Act and contended that since the amount was not paid before possession was taken, the claimants are entitled to the payment of interest under clause (a) of sub-s (3) of s.30 reads thus :
pp. 358–359, margin G
"(a) every case in which possession of any land acquired under the principal Act had been taken before the 30th day of April, 198:2 [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
p. 359, margin A
on and from that date;"
p. 359, margin B
It would, therefore, clearly indicate that if possession of the land ha$ been taken before 30th April, 1982, i.e. before the introduction of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill 1982, and the amount of compensation for such acquisition has not been paid or deposited under s.31, the claimant would be entitled to the payment of interest as contemplated under s.34 of the Principal Act. . Since the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1984 was not applicable to the State of Kerala, this Amending Act would be applicable only from the date on which the Amending Act has come into force, namely, September 24, 1984. Therefore, the claimants are not entitled to the benefits either under s.34 or s.28 as amended under Act 68 of 1984. The appeals are accordingly allowed. The statutory benefits granted by the High Court are set aside. The claimants are entitled only for 15% solatium and 4% interest under the Kerala Act. No costs. A.G. Appeal allowed.
p. 359, margin C