Point in Issue :
Whether in the facts of the case appellant is entitled to interest on solatium on amount of compensation.

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J.—The only issue which arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether or not the appellant would be entitled to payment of interest under Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on the solatium on the compensation paid in terms of the decision of the case in Sunder vs. Union of India reported in (2001) 7 SCC 211 and further explained in the case of Gurpreet Singh vs. Union of India reported in (2006) 8 SCC 457.

2. The land belonging to the appellant was acquired by issuing a notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”). A notification was issued on 4.10.1973 for the beneficiary, namely, Respondent No. 1 under Section 4 of the Act. Thereafter another notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued by the competent authority on 4.11.1976. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an Award in the land acquisition case wherein he determined the market value of the land at `1.28 per sq. meter. Possession of the land was also taken over by the Land Acquisition Officer on the date of the passing of the Award. Pursuant to the aforesaid Award, the appellant was paid an amount of ` 73,191.09.

3. Being aggrieved by the Award dated 22.9.1986, determining the market value of the land at ‘ 1.28 per sq. meter, the appellant filed two references under Section 18 of the Act. During the pendency of the aforesaid reference before the Reference Court, the respondent paid a further sum of ‘ 1,18,557.08 towards the balance compensation for the land.

4. By a judgment and order dated 26.2.1999, the Reference Court disposed of the case, determining the market value of the land at ‘ 30 per sq. meter. While disposing of the said case, the following decree was passed by the Reference Court.

1. The reference cases are hereby partly allowed and the Respondents are hereby ordered to pay ‘ 28.72 Ps. over and above ‘ 1.28 Ps. Per Sq. Mtr. already awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer for the acquired lands.

2. The claimants be also paid the solatium at the rate of 30% and interest at the rate of 9% per annum till one year after the possession of the acquired lands was taken by the Government, and if the amount is not paid within one year, the claimants is entitled to the interest at the rate of 15% per annum thereafter till the entire amount is deposited.

3. The claimants are also entitled to get increase of 12% from the date of publication of notification under Section 4 i.e. dated November 15, 1973 to the date of award i.e. September 22, 1986, passed by the Land Acquisition Officer, as provided under Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act.

******* ******** ******** *******

5. In terms of the aforesaid decree passed, a Schedule was also attached to the said judgment in which compensation payable to the appellant to the extent of market value of the land, solatium at the rate of 30% on the amount calculated and increase at the rate of 12 % per annum on the market value under Section 23(1A) was calculated.

6. Consequent thereto, the appellant filed an execution application for recovery of the balance amount as warded by the Reference Court. During the pendency of the aforesaid execution application, the respondent paid an amount as part payment of the dues payable by the respondent to the appellant. While the said execution case was pending, the appellant also filed an application for payment of the amount of interest payable under Section 34 of the Act, at the rate of 9% for the first year and 15% thereafter on the amount awarded by the Reference Court under Section 23(1A) and 23(2) of the Act. As against the said prayer of the appellant, the respondents filed objection. The said objection was heard by the executing court, and by an order dated 9.9.2002, the executing Court rejected the objection filed by the respondent No. 1 herein and issued a warrant for recovery of balance amount and further interest from 1.7.2002, relying on the ratio of the judgmen