1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6394/2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.482/1992 (Decided) AND CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6395/2007 IN FIRST APPEAL NO.483/1992 (Decided) Sau. Alaknanda w/o Shankarrao Patil ...Versus... The State of Maharashtra and others -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or Court's or Judge's Orders directions and Registrar's orders. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri R.J. Mirza, Adv. for applicant/ori. appellant] [Shri S.Y. Deopujari, AGP for respondents] CORAM:- A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED :- 05.05.2008 This civil application has been taken out by the applicant/original appellant, claiming that the additional component envisaged by Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 has not been added to the judgment delivered by this Court, while allowing the appeal preferred by the appellant. 2 Shri Mirza, learned Counsel for the applicant submits that this Court delivered the impugned judgment on the basis of common judgment, that was delivered by this court on 12.10.2001 in various first appeals, one of which was First Appeal No.661/1991 and that being so, the said additional component was subsequently added by the Court's order dated 1.11.2001, as it was left out inadvertently. Shri Deopujari, learned A.G.P. for the respondents examined the factual position and on the legal position he agrees that the additional component envisaged by Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, as amended, is required to be granted, in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Patel Joitaram Kalidas and others...Versus...Spl. Land Acquisition Officer and another, reported in 2007 (2) Supreme Court Cases 341. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.P. for the respondents. It appears that Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act provides for additional component to be calculated @ 12% per annum on the enhanced market value, which is to be granted. It is further clear that this Court disposed of the appeal preferred by the present appellant on the 3 basis of the judgment delivered by another Single Judge of this Court in First Appeal No.661/1991 decided on 12.10.2001. The said Court also added the said additional component subsequently under order dated 1.11.2001, when it was pointed out that the said additional component was not granted. Reading of Section 23 (1-A) of the Act also shows that the said additional component @ Rs.12% per annum is also required to to be granted and that situation is covered by the said judgment of the Supreme Court, cited by the learned A.G.P., Shri Deopujari. In this view of the matter, following operative part shall be added in the judgment and decree made by this Court in the appeal as item No.(vi – a) on page No.10 of the judgment. “I direct the respondents to pay the appellants additional component under Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, calculated at the rate of 12% P.A. on the enhanced market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under Section 4, sub-section (1) up to the date of the award of 4 the Collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.” The concerned Land Acquisition Officer is directed to disburse the payment under the judgment and decree made by this Court, as modified today, as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of three months from today. With the above observations and modification, the civil application is disposed of. JUDGE ssw