The executing court exceeded its jurisdiction by misinterpreting the award, and damages for land acquisition should be calculated based on the enhanced market value determined by the Reference Court.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

All these petitions have been heard and are being decided together by a single judgment as common questions of facts and law are involved.

2. In 1967, the State Government undertook construction of “Nadaun to Sujanpur” via Bada road. The land of the petitioners was utilized for construction of road without acquiring the same or compensating the petitioners adequately.

3. The petitioners approached this Court by way of CWP No.1356 of 2010. While deciding the said writ petition, this Court directed the respondents-State to acquire the land of petitioners and to pay them compensation in accordance with law.

4. Thereafter, the acquisition proceedings were initiated and an award, offering compensation to the petitioners, was passed as award No.8 by Land Acquisition Collector, HP PWD(CZ), Mandi on 29.05.2017.

5. Dissatisfied with the market value assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector, the petitioners filed Reference Petitions under Section 64 of Right to Fair Compensation and transparency Act-2013 (for short, “2013 Act”). The Reference Petitions separately filed by the petitioners in all these petitions, came to be decided by learned Additional District Judge, Hamirpur, vide common award dated 03.10.2020. The market value was enhanced from Rs 1000/- per square meter to Rs 1050/- per square meter. The most relevant component of the award passed by the learned reference court, for adjudication of these petitions, is the award of damages at the rate of 15% per annum on the market value w.e.f. 01.01.1968 to 31.07.2015.

6. The award passed by the learned reference court is stated to have attained finality.

7. The petitioners filed execution petitions as according to them the respondents did not deposit the amount of enhanced compensation in terms of award passed by the reference court.

8. In the execution proceedings, the respondents-State took the stand that it had deposited the entire amount as per award passed by learned reference court, which position was specifically denied by the petitioners. The dispute primarily arose as to the amount required to be deposited on account of damages at the rate of 15% per annum awarded for the period 01.01.1968 to 31.07.2015. The petitioners claimed the damages at the rate of 15% per annum on the market value of land assessed at Rs.1050/- per square meter by the reference court. On the other hand, the respondents-State maintained that the damages at the rate of 15% per annum were to be calculated on the market value of land as on 01.01.1968.

9. Learned Executing Court, while sustaining the contention of the respondents, has held that the damages at the rate of 15% per annum for the period 01.01.1968 to 31.07.2015 has rightly been assessed and deposited on the market rate of the land applicable on 01.01.1968. The execution petitions filed by the petitioners have accordingly been dismissed as fully satisfied. Aggrieved against such orders, the petitioners are before this Court by way of these petitions.

10. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records carefully.

11. The operative portion of award dated 03.10.2020, passed by learned reference court, reads as under:

“34. In view of the findings returned on aforesaid issues, all the petitions are partly allowed and the petitioners are held entitled to compensation of their acquired land @ Rs. 1050/- per square meter and Solatium equivalent to 100% thereof, additional amount @ 12% on the market value with effect from 31.07.2015 to 29.05.2017 and interest by way of damages @ 15% per annum on market value w.e.f. 01.01.1968 to 31.07.2015 and also interest @ 15% per annum from the date of Notification i.e. 31.07.2015 till payment of the amount as per provisions of section 72 and 80 of RFC Act. The Collector is also directed to pay cost of the litigation which is assessed Rs.10,000/- each. Memo of costs be prepared accordingly.”

11. It will also be necessary to reproduce paragraphs 25 to 28 of the awa