The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Order II Rule 2 CPC to writ proceedings and the entitlement of the landowner to claim rent or damages as a component of compensation under the Land Acquisition Act.

Kurian Joseph, J.

In order to adjudicate the present issue raised in this petition, following questions arise for determination:

i) Whether the rent or damages for use and occupation of the land for a period prior to the Section 4(1) Notification under the Land Acquisition Act is a component of compensation under the Act?

ii) If so, for such compensation, whether interest at the rates provided under the Act is payable?

iii) After the stages of award, reference to civil court and appeal to the High Court, whether claim to such damages can be independently pursued?

iv) Whether such grievances after exhausting the remedies under the Act can be pursued in a writ petition?

2. The writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

“a) That the respondents may kindly be directed to determine the amount of rent or damages for use & occupation of the property of the petitioners form the date of possession i.e. 1005-1960 to the date of notification i.e. 31.12.1994 of the property of the petitioners & after determining the same, the same may please be ordered to be paid to the petitioners along with interest @ 18% from the date of possession till the date of payment to the petitioners. b) That the respondent may also be directed to produce the entire record of the petitioner’s case before this Hon’ble Court to show unto this Hon’ble Court that how best & in what illegal & arbitrary manner a citizen can be deprived of his right to property without any due process of law, so that in future the same illegality may not be repeated with any other citizen in the state. c) That the respondents may please be directed to complete the entire exercise in this regard within a period of 4 months from the date of order & in the meantime they may also be restrained from recovering the amount of interest which stands paid to the petitioners in the year 1998, which may please be ordered to be adjusted fro m the amount of compensation of rent or damages for use & occupation of the property of the petitioners to be determined by the respondents qua which the respondents has initiated proceedings before the Court of Ld. Distt. Judge, Shimla, H.P.”

3. It is seen that the petitioners were not satisfied with the award dated 9.8.1995 and hence they had pursued their grievance before the Reference Court leading to Annexure P-1, order. The Civil Court, as per Annexure P-1 order, granted certain reliefs. Still not satisfied, the matter was pursued in RFA No.155 of 1998 before this Court. The appeal was disposed of vide judgment dated 28.6.2007.

4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that though the grievance with regard to quantum was dealt with, the grievance with regard to the claim for rent and occupation charges during the period the property was in possession of the Government has not been dealt with. According to the petitioners, they are entitled to the same in view of the decision of the Apex Court in R.L. Jain Versus DDA, (2004) 4 Supreme Court Cases 79. We do not think that it will be proper for this Court at this stage in proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to go into the question as to whether the petitioners are entitled to that component of compensation. That grievance the petitioners have pursued in accordance with the procedure prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 initially before the Collector, thereafter before the Civil Court and finally in appeal before the High Court. According to the petitioners, though this grievance was raised, the same has not been adverted to. If that be so, a civil writ petition or for that matter any other collateral proceeding is not the remedy. All contentions, which a party might and ought to have taken, should be taken in the original proceedings and not thereafter. That is the well settled principle under Order II Rule 2 CPC. Order II Rule 2 reads as follows:

“2.Suit to include the whole claim. – (1) Every suit shall include the whole of the clai