HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2246 of 2006 Date: September 15, 2011 Between: 1. Nakka Devadanam (died) and 2 others. … Petitioners and District Social Welfare Officer, (Land Acquisition Officer), Guntur, Guntur District. … Respondent * * * HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.2246 of 2006 O R D E R: The petitioners/decree holders are aggrieved by the dismissal of the execution petition on the ground that they have received excess amount of compensation than claimed in the E.P. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners points out that the assumption of the court below that the petitioners have received excess amount than their entitlement is clearly incorrect and for that purpose has demonstrated the error allegedly committed in the impugned order, by relying upon the calculation memos filed by the decree holders as well as the judgment debtor before the executing court. 3. Learned Government Pleader for Arbitration appearing for the respondent justifies the calculation memo filed on behalf of the judgment debtor and contends that the petitioners are not entitled to any further claim of Rs.33,366/- as shown in the decree holders’ calculation memo. 4. The Award is dated 20th January 1983, which is subsequent to the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984, which was introduced in the shape of a Bill in Parliament on 30.4.1982. The petitioners are therefore entitled to interest on solatium, as their claim for compensation was admittedly pending in the first appeal before this Court till 27.7.1998. When their appeal was allowed by granting compensation at the rate of Rs.50,000/- per acre together with all benefits, the petitioners have calculated the interest at 15% on solatium of Rs.9,563/- from the date of Award till the date of filing of the calculation memo and arrived at an amount of Rs.33,366/- which is sought to be recovered in the E.P. The respondent/judgment debtor, however, in his calculation memo confined the calculation of interest @ 15% from 25.3.1983 up to 31.3.2004. Thus, it is evident that calculation of interest from the date of Award till filing of E.P. as mentioned by the decree holders in their calculation memo was not reflected in the calculation memo of the judgment debtor and that explains the difference between the two calculation memos. The executing court has not looked into this aspect and merely on assumption that the decree holders have received excess amount, dismissed the E.P. 5. The Civil Revision petition is therefore allowed setting aside the order dated 21.11.2005 passed in E.P. No.45 of 2002 in L.A.O.P. No.23 of 1985 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, and the E.P. shall stand restored to file. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, shall look into the calculation memos filed by both sides in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders on the execution petition within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The executing court shall give notices to both sides to enable them to file fresh calculation memos if they so desired. There shall be no order as to costs. ____________________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J Date: September 15, 2011. BSB