Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Lok Pal Singh, J.
Gurbachan Singh – Appellant
Versus
Power Grid Corporation & others – Respondents
First Appeal No. 109 & 113 of 2013
Decided On : 14-02-2018
LAND ACQUISITION - INTEREST ON COMPENSATION - RENT OR DAMAGES FOR USE AND OCCUPATION OF LAND - STATUTORY INTEREST - SPECIAL COSTS OF LITIGATION.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent Corporation without any authority of law started encroaching upon the remaining land measuring 0.224 hectare (2440 sq. mt.) under the said khasra no. 210/3 of the petitioner, without paying any compensation or rent thereon. Since illegal possession was taken by the respondent Corporation over the appellant’s land, the appellant preferred civil suit no. 39 of 2007, before the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Khatima. Said court passed an interim order dated 30.10.2007, restraining the respondent Corporation from carrying on construction activities over the land in question until compensation based on circle rates is paid to the appellant. Against said order, respondent Corporation preferred a civil appeal no. 92 of 2007, before the District Judge, Rudrapur. Said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 15.02.2008.
Finding of the Court:
1. The appellant is legally entitled for rent or damages in the form of interest for use and occupation of his land for the period prior to issuance of Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Is so, then on what rate? 2. The appellant is entitled for statutory interest on compensation awarded to the landowner due to delay in payment of compensation? 3. The appellant is entitled to special costs for the litigation pursued by the respondent Corporation under Section 35A of the Code of Civil Procedure?
Issues: 1. Whether the appellant is legally entitled for rent or damages in the form of interest for use and occupation of his land for the period prior to issuance of Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. Is so, then on what rate? 2. Whether the appellant is entitled for statutory interest on compensation awarded to the landowner due to delay in payment of compensation? 3. Whether the appellant is entitled to special costs for the litigation pursued by the respondent Corporation under Section 35A of the Code of Civil Procedure?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. In a case where the landlord is dispossessed prior to the issuance of preliminary notification under Section 4(1) of the Act the Government merely takes possession of the land but the title thereof continues to vest with the landowner. It is fully open for the landowner to recover the possession of his land by taking appropriate legal proceedings. He is therefore only entitled to get rent or damages for use and occupation for the period the Government retains possession of the property. 2. The appellant/landowner is entitled to receive the damages in the shape of 15% interest per annum on the amount awarded by the Special Land Acquisition Officer as compensation. 3. The appellant/decree holder is entitled to compensatory costs as envisaged under Section 35A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The same is quantified at Rs.2,50,000/- for the entire litigation, i.e., right from trial court upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Final Decision: Appeal of the appellant/decree holder is allowed with costs. The appeal of the respondent Corporation is dismissed with costs, under the circumstances enumerated above. The appellant/decree holder is entitled to compensatory costs as envisaged under Section 35A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The same is quantified at Rs.2,50,000/- for the entire litigation, i.e., right from trial court upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Lok Pal Singh, J.
First Appeal no. 109 of 2013, filed by the appellant Gurbachan Singh, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 16.07.2013, passed in Reference Case no. 11 of 2011, by II Addl. District Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar, whereby the reference has been partially allowed by the said Court by awarding compensation as under:
1(a) Interest at the rate of 15% per annum on the amount of Rs. 2,50,88,418/- from the date of possession of acquired land, i.e. 11.01.2005, situated at Village Chikaghat, Pargana Kilpuri, Tehsil Sitarganj, admeasuring 0.244 Hectare (2440.00 sq. mt.) till the date of issuance of Notification under Section 4-A i.e. 05.09.2008.
1(b) 7% interest per annum on the entire amount of said interest under 1(a) above, from 05.09.2008 till the date of final payment.
2(a) 15% interest per annum on the total amount of Award of Rs. 2,50,88,418/- from 06.09.2008 to 24.10.2008.
2(b) 15% interest per annum on Rs. 2,20,88,418/- from 25.10.2008 to 10.06.2010.
2(c) 15% interest on balance amount of Rs. 41,06,378/- from 11.06.2010 to 30.12.2010.
2(d) 7% interest per annum on the total amount of entire interest under 2(a), 2(b) and 2(c) above, from 30.12.2010 till the date of payment to the claimant.
In other words, by way of filing present first appeal, enhancement of interest on amount of compensation is being claimed by the appellant (landowner). In addition, reasonable/justified costs of litigation are also being claimed in this appeal.
First Appeal no. 113 of 2013, has been filed by the appellant Power Grid Corporation of India, for setting aside the judgment and decree dated 16.07.2013, passed in Reference Case no. 11 of 2011, by II Addl. District Judge, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar.
2. Since aforementioned first appeals have arisen out of the same judgment and decree, therefore, they are being decided together by this common judgment for the sake of brevity and convenience.
3. Heard Mr. Gurbachan Singh, appellant, in person and Mr. A.S. Rawat, Sr. Advocate assisted by Mr. K.H. Gupta, Advocate for respondent no. 1 carefully, perused the impugned judgment & decree and other documents brought on record.
4. Briefly put, appellant (Gurbachan Singh) was owner of land measuring 0.307 hectare, with transferable right bearing khasra no. 210/3, situated at village Chikaghat, Khatima Road, Sitarganj, Udham Singh Nagar. A part of the said land measuring 0.063 hectare was acquired by the State of Uttarakhand for the respondent Power Grid Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as ‘respondent Corporation’) for installing a 220/132 K.V. Sub Station.
5. Dispute between the parties arose only when the respondent Corporation without any authority of law started encroaching upon the remaining land measuring 0.224 hectare (2440 sq. mt.) under the said khasra no. 210/3 of the petitioner, without paying any compensation or rent thereon. Since illegal possession was taken by the respondent Corporation over the appellant’s land, the appellant preferred civil suit no. 39 of 2007, before the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.) Khatima. Said court passed an interim order dated 30.10.2007, restraining the respondent Corporation from carrying on construction activities over the land in question until compensation based on circle rates is paid to the appellant. Against said order, respondent Corporation preferred a civil appeal no. 92 of 2007, before the District Judge, Rudrapur. Said appeal was dismissed vide order dated 15.02.2008.
6. Feeling aggrieved, respondent Corporation filed WPMS no. 371 of 2008, before this Court, challenging the order dated 15.02.2008.
7. High Court vide order dated 21.04.2008, passed the following order, while deciding MCC application no. 365 of 2008 in aforesaid writ petition. The same is being excerpted here-in-below:
“Reply has been filed in the Court today by respondent no. 1, which is taken on record.
The applicant may file rejoinder thereto in one week from today.
List on 6th May, 2008.
In the meanwhile, subjec
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
