SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(UK) 748

2011 (1) UAD 611
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Hon’ble Dr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil R. Dave
Civil Appeal Nos. 3568, 3566 & 3567 of 2005
SARUP SINGH & ANR. – Appellants
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – Respondents
Decided on : 25.11.2010

Advocates appeared:
For the Appellants :Mrs. Nanita Sharma, Ms. Shalini, Mr. Vivek Sharma, Mr. K.R. Gupta, Mr. R.C. Gubrele, Mr. Suresh Kumar Sharma, Mr. Shishpal L., Mr. Balbir Singh Gupta, Advocates
For the Respondents:Mr. Mohan Parasaran, ASG, Mr. S. Wasim A. Qadri, Mr. M. Ullah, Mr. Anil Katiyar, Ms. Sushma Suri, Advocates

Headnote:(A)Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Secs. 23, 23(1-A), 23(2), 34 as amended by Amendment Act 68 of 1984, Secs. 30(1), 30(2) — Rate of solatium and interest — Benefit of enhancement in — Availability — Such benefits not given to such claimants whose land had been acquired in those cases — Where payment of compensation was finalized prior to coming into effect of Amendment Act 68 of 1984. (Paras 11 to 17)

       (B) Jurisdiction — Powers — Scope and ambit of — If a particular Court lacks inherent jurisdiction in passing a decree or making an order — A decree or order passed by such Court would be without jurisdiction and non-est and void ab initio. (Paras 11 to 31)

       (C) Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Secs. 151, 152 — A decree once passed and having become final and binding — Cannot be sought to be amended by filing petition u/s 151 & 152 of Civil Code.

        (Paras 24 & 29)

       ¼v½ Hkwfe vtZu vf/kfu;e] 1894] /kkjk 23, 23¼1&,½, 23¼2½, 34 & la'kksf/kr vfèkfu;e 68 lu~ 1894] /kkjk 30¼1½] 30¼2½ }kjk la'kksf/kr & lkaRouk ds :i esa {kfriwfrZ dh nj vkSj c<+h gqbZ nj dh miyC/krk rFkk ykHk & ,slh Hkwfe tks vftZr dh tk pqdh Fkh] ds ekeyksa esa ,sls ykHk dks ,sls nkosnkjksa dks ugha fn;k tk ldrk vkSj ftudk eqvkotk la'kksf/kr vf/kfu;e 68 lu~ 1984 ds izHkkfor gksus ls iwoZ Hkqxrku vfUre :i ls fd;k tk pqdk FkkA ¼izLrj 11 ls 17½

       ¼c½ {ks=kf/kdkj & 'kfDr;k¡ o mu dk foLrkj vkSj ifjf/k & ;fn dksbZ [kkl U;k;ky; fMdh ikfjr djus vFkok dksbZ vkns'k nsus esa =qfV djrk gS rks ml U;k;ky; }kjk ikfjr fMdh vFkok vkns'k {ks=kf/kdkj ds ckgj gksxk vkSj Lor% gh vfLrRo jfgr vkSj voSèkkfud ekuk tk,xkA ¼izLrj 11 ls 31½

       ¼l½ nhokuh izfd;k lafgrk] 1908] /kkjk 151] 152 & dksbZ fMdh ,d ckj vfUre :i ls ikfjr gksus vkSj ck/; gksus ds dkj.k /kkjk 151 vkSj 152 ds rgr ;kfpdk nk;j djus ds vk/kkj ij la'kksf/kr ugha dh tk ldrhA ¼izLrj 24 ,oa 29½

JUDGMENT

Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, J. — As the facts and issues involved are similar and interconnected, we propose to dispose of all the appeals by this common judgment and order. However, we may record the facts of each of the cases separately and deal with the issues at one place as they are interconnected.

Civil Appeal No. 3568 of 2005

2. This appeal arises out of the acquisition of land of Sarup Singh, the appellant herein, by issuing a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] on 09.10.1974. Possession of the land was taken on 03.12.1974 and the award was passed on 11.06.1975. As against the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Collector, Bhatinda Cantonment, a reference case was filed which was decided by the Reference Court on 31.07.1979. Finally, the matter came to be decided by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. The High Court by an order dated 08.12.1982, determined the market value of the land and the appellants herein were also granted solatium at 15 per cent and also interest at 6 per cent per annum. The aforesaid judgment and order passed by the High Court became final and binding as no appeal was brought to this Court thereafter.

3. Subsequently, however, the decree holders-appellants filed Civil miscellaneous Applications No. 1296 of 1985 under Sections 151 and 152 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [for short “C.P.C.”] praying for solatium and interest at the enhanced rate as provided for by the amendment in the Act (by way of Act 68 of 1984) which was given effect from 24.09.1984. The High Court allowed the said Miscellaneous Petition by order dated 17.02.1986 by passing an order enhancing the payment of solatium from 15 per cent to 30 per cent and interest from 6 per cent to 9 per cent per annum for the first year after acquisition and 15 per cent per annum thereafter till the date of actual payment of the enhanced amount of compensation.

4. On the basis of the aforesaid order dated 17.02.1986, the appellants filed an execution application before the Additional District Judge, Bhatinda. The execution application was dismissed by the Additional District Judge, Bhatinda by an order dated 30.08.2001 holding that the appellants herein are not entitled to enhanced rate of solatium and interest as the award of the Collector and that of the reference court in their case was passed prior to 30.04.1982. The Additional District Judge further held that the order passed by the High Court under Sections 151 and 152 of C.P.C. was without jurisdiction and as such a nullity.

5. Being aggrieved by the said order, the appellants herein filed a miscellaneous petition before the High Court which was registered as Civil Revision No. 5481 of 2001 and by the impugned order dated 24.09.2002, the same was dismissed upholding the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Bhatinda as against which the present appeal was filed.

Civil Appeal No. 3566 of 2005

6. This appeal arises out of the same notification dated 09.10.1974, as that of Civil Appeal No. 3568 of 2005, issued by the respondents under Section 4 of the Act proposing to acquire land belonging to one Chuhar Singh. Chuhar Singh died subsequently and therefore his sons, viz., Hardev Singh, Balwant Singh and Gurbachan Singh preferred claim on the basis of which the Special Land Acquisition Collector, Bhatinda Cantonment gave his award on 11.06.1975. As the appellants sought for reference, a reference case was registered in which the Additional District Judge passed a judgment and order dated 31.07.1979. The matter was taken to the High Court which was initially registered as RFA No. 10687 of 1980 and was decided on 30.07.1981. After which a Letters patent Appeal No. 128 of 1982 was filed which was decided on 18.12.1985 and the said was partly allowed and the respondents were directed to pay solatium at the rate of 30 per cent of the market value of the acquired land as determined by the court and also interest a
































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top