1. Short point which arises for consideration in these writ petitions relates to a claim of the petitioner deducting tax at source (hereinafter referred to as ‘TDS’) in respect of compensation awarded by the jurisdictional reference Court with statutory benefits and interest thereon and same being paid by the petitioner herein as beneficiary of the acquisition.

2. Facts in brief which has led to filing of these writ petitions are as under:

Government of Karnataka after issuing preliminary and final notifications, has acquired various lands for the benefit of Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited (for short ‘KPTCL’) and lands so acquired has been transferred by KPTCL to the petitioner in the year 2003 for establishment of a 400/220 KV Substation at Mysore. Said transfer has taken place on account of petitioner – Corporation being ‘Deemed Transmission Licensee’ in the capacity of “Central Transmission Utility” as prescribed under Sections 38 & 40 of the Electricity Act, 2003.

3. Land losers in the respective writ petitions not being satisfied with the quantum of compensation awarded by Land Acquisition Officer, had approached the reference Court for enhancement of compensation and by different judgment and awards, reference Court enhanced the compensation amount payable to them and ordered for grant of interest on the enhanced compensation. Petitioner in terms of judgment and awards passed by reference Court has deposited the enhanced compensation with interest after deducting TDS before reference Court as stated herein below:

Sl. No.	LAC No.	Enhanced compensation with statutory interest Rs.	TDS deducted Rs.	Balance amount deposited Rs.
1	162/2002	1,60,67,311/-	32,13,462/-	1,28,53,849/-
2	179/2004	2,47,99,726/-	32,65,494/-	2,15,34,232/-
3	163/2002	32,30,013/-	6,46,003/-	25,84,010/-
4	164/2002	1,40,19,645/-	28,03,929/-	1,12,15,716/-

4. Issue relating to payment of interest on the enhanced compensation namely, as to whether it should be paid from the date of preliminary notification or from the date of possession had been assailed by petitioners in different appeals before this Court. Said issue has been laid to rest by Division Bench of this Court in the case of SHIVARUDRAPPA FAKIRAPPA UPPIN (SINCE DECEASED) BY L.Rs AND OTHERS Vs. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KARNATAKA HOUSING BOARD, HUBLI AND ANOTHER reported in 2010(1) KCCR 543 (DB) where under, it came to be held that interest would be payable from the date of possession of the respective lands being taken and not from the date of preliminary notification by relying upon Hon’ble Apex Court judgment.

5. In order to enjoy the fruits of the compensation awarded by reference Court as affirmed in appeals and same having not been paid by the writ petitioners herein, land losers filed execution petitions before the jurisdictional Civil Court. Writ petitioners contended before the Executing Court that petitioner herein was not empowered or entitled to deduct tax at source on the interest amount. After considering rival contentions, executing Court has passed the impugned orders by arriving at a conclusion that judgment debtor namely, petitioner herein was in error in deducting tax at source while depositing the award amount since interest was part of the compensation and as such, judgment debtor i.e., writ petitioners could not have deducted tax at source. Executing Court has further directed the judgment debtor namely, writ petitioner herein to make good the short fall amount namely, the amounts already deducted at source by way of TDS, by depositing the same and granting liberty to the judgment debtor to seek for refund of such amounts remitted to the TDS account of the Income Tax Department.

6. It is the contention of Sri. Christopher, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of Sri Joshua Hudson Samuel for pet