1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FIRST APPEAL NO.752 OF 1991 The Special Land Acquisition Officer.... Appellants Bhima Irrigation Project Solapur & Ors. Vs. Dashrath Gopaji Galande (deceased) .... Respondents through his LRs & Ors. Mrs. Geeta Mulekar, AGP for Appellants. None for respondents. Coram : SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA, J. Date : 10th December, 2008 P.C. 1. This First Appeal arises out of the order dated 27th September,1985 passed on Land Acquisition Reference No.96 of 1976 by the District Court, Solapur. Mrs. Mulekar,the learned AGP for the appellants states that the appellants restrict the challenge to the impugned order to paragraph (B) of the operative order, which reads as follows : “B) The Opponent-Government of Maharashtra shall also pay an additional amount calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. on the market value of the property i.e. Rs.43,631.33 Ps. (i.e. 2/3rd share in the market value of the properties Rs.65,447/-) for the period commencing on and from the date of the Publication of the Notification under Sec.4 Sub. Section (1), in respect of such land 2 (i.e.8th November,1973) to the date of the Award of the Special Land Acquisition Officer (i.e.13th November,1975) or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier, under section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act to the LRs of deceased Applicant- Dashrath Galande and Appliants- Manohar Galande and Mohan Galande. 2. Learned AGP submits relying upon a decision of the Apex court in Union of India and others vs. Filip Tiago De Gama of Vedem Vasco De Gama reported in (1990) 1 Supreme Court Cases page 277 that the benefit of additional amount under Section 23(1-A) is not available where the award made by the Collector is dated prior to 30th April,1982. The decision cited by Mrs. Mulekar has been subsequently applied with approval in several decisions of the Apex Court including the decision in Kashiben Bhikabai and others vs.Special Land Acquisition Officer and another reported in (2002) 2 Supreme Court Cases page 605. Perused both the decisions cited by Mrs.Mulekar. It has been held that additional compensation available under Section 23(1-A) is not available to claimants where the award was made by the Collector prior to 30th April,1982. Therefore, the order in terms of paragraph (B) of the operative order cannot be sustained. The Appeal is partly allowed. The 3 operative part of the impugned judgment and decree is modified by deleting paragraph (B) therefrom. The subsequent paragraphs (C), (D) and (E) will stand re- numbered as paragraphs (B), (C) and (D). (SMT. R.P. SONDURBALDOTA,J)