Judgment

K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY, J.:- Special Leave granted.

2. This case raises yet another variant of a vexed question. Does Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (as amended by Act 68 of 1984) providing for higher solatium proprio vigore apply to award made subsequent to 24 September 1984 even though the acquisition commenced prior to the said date. The appeal also raises another important question as to the applicability of Section 23(1-A) providing additional amount of compensation to awards made in such acquisition proceedings.

3. The facts are not in dispute and may be stated as follows:

By notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act) published in the Government Gazette on 26 October 1967, the State Government declared its intention to acquire the land belonging to the respondent for establishing Naval Air Station Dabolim. On 23 February 1968, notification under Section 6 was published in Gazette. On 5 March 1969 the Land Acquisition Officer declared award determining compensation at the rate of 40 paise per square meter with solatium at 15 per cent.

4. The claimant had sought reference under Section 18 of the Act and reference was duly made to the Civil Court (District Judge). On 28 May 1985, the Court after investigation of the claim awarded compensation at Rs. 3 per square meter. The Court also awarded solatium at 15 per cent and interest at 6 per cent from the date of taking possession till payment of compensation. Not being satisfied, the claimant preferred an appeal to the High Court seeking further enhancement of compensation and also solatium at 30 per cent. This claim was apparently based on the new provisions introduced by the Amending Act 68 of 1984. The High Court accepted. the appeal and granted the reliefs in the following terms:

"The impugned award dated 28th May, 1985, is modified. The appellant is entitled to the added benefits. In that he shall be entitled to have the compensation at the rate of 12% of the market value from the date of Section 4 notification till the date of possession or the date of award, whichever is earlier. The appellant is further entitled to interest at the rate of 9% for the first year from the date of taking over possession and thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of deposit or payment as the case may be. The appellant shall be entitled to further 15 per cent solatium in addition to the 15 per cent already granted to him. To the extent indicated above, the award shall stand modified."

5. The High Court has thus granted three more reliefs to the claimant: (i) Additional amount at the rate of 12 per cent of the market value from the date of notification under S. 4 till the date of taking over possession; (ii) interest at the rate of 9% for the first year from the date of taking possession and 15 per cent for the subsequent years; and (iii) solatium at 30 per cent on the market value.

6. There is no grievance made in this appeal as to the second of the reliefs granted to the claimant. The claimant is entitled to the interest under S. 28 of the Act. The challenge is only against the first and the third of the said reliefs. They were evidently given under the amended Ss. 23(1 -A) and 23(2) of the Act.

7. We will first take up the question of solatium. On 30 April 1982, the corresponding Bill of the Amending Act 68 of 1984, namely, Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill 1982, was introduced in Parliament. On 24 September, 1984 it became law as the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 68 of 1984, when it received assent of the President. Before the amendment, S. 23(2) provided solatium at 15 per cent on the market value. After amendment by Act 68 of 1984 solatium was raised to 30 per cent on the market value. S. 23(2) now reads:

"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."

8. T