IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 4410 of 1988. Date of Decision: 11th December, 2008. Smt. Jeo & Ors. ....Petitioners through Mr. R.S.Minhas, Advocate Versus Union of India & Ors. .Respondents through Mr. S.K.Sharma, Advocate. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) The petitioners seek a Mandamus for payment of arrears of interest @6% per annum on the compensation amount of their acquired land, as has been awarded by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur vide his order dated 2.1.1985. Vide notice dated 9.1.1970 [Annexure P-1], the land of the petitioners was acquired by the Union of India under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 [in short 1952 Act]. The petitioners being dis-satisfied with the compensation determined by the Collector, sought reference before the Arbitrator in terms of the provisions of the 1952 Act. The matter was eventually referred and decided by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur vide his order dated 1.6.1981 whereby the compensation amount was enhanced and was directed to be paid along with interest @6% per annum from the date of the award till realization. The petitioners thereafter moved an application under Section 152/153 CPC for correction in the award to the extent that the interest amount be made payable from the 'date of acquisition' till realization and not from the 'date of award' only. Their application was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur vide his order dated 2.1.1985. The petitioners, however, have not been paid the afore- mentioned arrears of interest by the respondents, prompting them to file this writ petition. A counter-affidavit has been filed by the respondents in which a preliminary objection has been taken to the effect that the petitioners are not entitled to interest @6% per annum from the date of acquisition on more than one grounds. Suffice it to say that the order dated 2.1.1985 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur has not been impugned by the respondents. The same has attained finality. The preliminary objection that notwithstanding the order passed by a court of competent jurisdiction that the petitioners are not entitled to charge interest from the date of acquisition of their land, is bordering contempt of Court. However, initiation of such proceedings at this stage may not yield effective results including the payment of arrears of interest to which the petitioners are entitled to in terms of the order passed by the learned Additional District Judge and which has attained finality. However, further defiance, if any, can always be seriously viewed. Consequently, this writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to make payment of the arrears of interest @6% per annum from the date of acquisition till realization thereof within a period of three months from the date a certified copy of this order is received and submit a compliance report, failing which the Registry is directed to initiate suo-moto contempt of Court proceedings against the respondents. Disposed of. December 11, 2008. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE