JUDGMENT

Anil Kshetarpal, J.

By this order, a batch of 21 civil revision petitions (details whereof are at the foot of the judgment) shall stand disposed of.

2. In the considered opinion of this Court, the following two questions arise for adjudication:-

i) Whether the Executing Court can direct the payment of interest on the additional amount payable at the rate of 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1894 Act') particularly when there is no such specific direction in the award passed under Section 18 or appeal under Section 54 of the 1894 Act or the Letters Patent Appeal?

ii) Whether the Executing Court can direct the payment of interest on the amount of solatium payable under Section 23 (2) of the 1894 Act before the date of judgment passed in Sundar v. Union of India (2001) 7 SCC 211 particularly when there is no specific order to this effect by the court in the award under Section 18 or appeal under Section 54 of the 1894 Act or the Letters Patent Appeal?

3. This batch of revision petition has been filed challenging the correctness of the orders passed by the Executing Court on 20th October, 2016 and 23rd March, 2021. Without going into the detailed facts or tracing the history of the acquisition, it is sufficient to notice that the Reference Court (hereinafter referred to as 'RC') vide award dated 6th April, 1998 re-assessed the market value while observing as under:-

51. In view of my finding on the issues above, the market value of the acquired land of the petitioners in all the land references, irrespective of the quality of the land, is determined as Rs.2,33,750/- per acre. It is made clear that the total area of the acquired land of petitioner. Gram Panchayat of village Sher Majra is 41 kanals and, therefore, the compensation/enhanced compensation to the Gram Panchayat should be paid accordingly. It is further made clear that the acquired area of petitioners Nitia Nand etc. in land reference No. 116-I is 80 kanals 5 Marlas and not 79 kanals 16 Marlas and they are entitled to compensation/enhanced compensation, accordingly. Benefits of increase at the rate of 12% under section 23 (1-A), solatium under section 23 (2) and interest under section 28 of the Act, as admissible thereunder, are also allowed to the petitioners on the enhanced amount of compensation. The date of taking the possession of the acquired land is held as 3.2.1992, as already held by me as per my detailed discussion in para in 64 and 65 of award Ex.P19."

4. In appeal under Section 54 of the 1894 Act, the High Court vide judgment dated 1st April, 1999 held as under:-

"In view of the above detailed discussion, the judgment/ award of the learned Additional District Judge, Patiala dated 6.4.1998 is modified to the extent that claimants would be entitled to receive a compensation of Rs.92.60 per square yard (Rs.4,48,159. Per acre) with all statutory benefits under Sections 23(1-A), 23 (2) and 28 of the Act. In view of the above, the appeals preferred by the State arising from the awards passed by the learned District Judge in Regular First Appeal No.3531 of 1998, titled Union of India v. Hardev Singh, Regular First Appeal No. 3557 of 1998 titled Union of India v. Gram Panchayat, Pashiana, and Regular First Appeal No. 3745 of 1998 titled Union of India and others v. Babu Ram and others, are dismissed. However, the appeals preferred by the claimants are partly accepted to the above extent, leaving the parties to bear their own costs."

5. In Letters Patent Appeal decided on 25th February, 2005, the operative part of the judgment reads as under:-

"When we add amount of sale instance Ex.X-3 in the value of above mentioned six sale instances, total sale consideration would come to Rs.37,44,271/- and average price per acre comes to Rs.5,34,896/-. Cut to the extent of 15% would come to Rs.80,234/-. Accordingly, net amount payable per acre would come to Rs.4,54,662/-. This Court is of the opinion that