fa1239.11 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD FIRST APPEAL NO.1239 OF 2011 The Executive Engineer, Uppar Penganga Project Division No.3, Nanded ...APPELLANT. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Nanded, 2) The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Uppar Penganga Project No.1, Nanded, Dist-Nanded, 3) Hariharrao Vishwanath Pande, Age-55 years, Occu:Agriculture, R/o-Ardhapur, Tq-Ardhapur, Dist-Nanded. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.S.P. Sonpawale Advocate for Appellant. Shri.T.S. Lodhe, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri.A.R. Rathod Advocate for Respondent No.3. ... WITH fa1239.11 2 FIRST APPEAL NO.1240 OF 2011 The Executive Engineer, Uppar Penganga Project Division No.3, Nanded ...APPELLANT. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Nanded. 2) The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Uppar Penganga Project No.1, Nanded, Dist-Nanded, 3) Pundlik Ramji died through L.R.s 3A) Limbaji Pundlik Sakhare, Age-60 years, Occu:Agril. 3B) Ramji Pundlik Sakhare, Age-40 years, Occu:Agril, 3C) Ahilyabai Laxman Sakhare, Age-32 years, Occu:Agril, All R/o- Ardhapur, Tq-Ardhapur, Dist-Nanded. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.S.P. Sonpawale Advocate for Appellant. Shri.S.N. Kendre, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri.A.R. Rathod Advocate for Respondent No.3A) to 3C). ... fa1239.11 3 WITH FIRST APPEAL NO.1241 OF 2011 The Executive Engineer, Uppar Penganga Project Division No.3, Nanded ...APPELLANT. VERSUS 1) The State of Maharashtra, Through Collector, Nanded, 2) The Special Land Acquisition Officer, Uppar Penganga Project No.1, Nanded, Dist-Nanded, 3) Falaji Waman Kanode, Age-70 years, Occu:Agriculture, R/o-Ardhapur, Tq-Ardhapur, Dist-Nanded. ...RESPONDENTS. ... Shri.S.P. Sonpawale Advocate for Appellant. Shri.T.S. Lodhe, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri.A.R. Rathod Advocate for Respondent No.3. ... CORAM: R.M. BORDE, J. DATE : 11TH JULY, 2011 fa1239.11 4 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for the respective parties. With the consent of the Parties, the Appeals are admitted and taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. 2. These are the Appeals by Acquiring Body raising exception to the Judgments and Awards passed by the Joint Civil Judge, Senior Division, Nanded on 29th December, 2009 in L.A. R. No.13 of 2005, L.A.R. NO.22 of 2005 and L.A.R. No.12 of 2005, respectively. 3. The lands belonging to the claimants, came to be acquired for construction of a Nimgaon Branch Canal. A notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 18th December, 1998 and after following due procedure under the law, award came to be passed on 31st January, 2001 by the Special Land Acquisition fa1239.11 5 Officer. The only grievance made in the Appeals, is in respect of the direction contained in Para-6 of the operative portion of the Award passed by the Reference Court, so also the direction in respect of payment of interest even on the 80% amount of compensation, which according to the Acquiring Body, is deposited prior to passing of the Award. 4. The objection as regards the computation of interest on the amount already deposited by the Acquiring Body, shall be dealt with in an execution application, which would be presented by the respective claimants. It would be for the executing Court to compute the interest on the amount enhanced by the Reference Court, while permitting withdrawal of the amount by the claimants. No specific directions in respect of computation of interest would be necessary and it would be open for the executing Court, even inspite of the directions, if any, by the fa1239.11 6 Reference Court, to determine the issue and make payment of compensation to the claimants. Any error crept in the Award in that respect, shall be deemed to have been corrected. 5. The next objection in respect of payment of interest at the rate of 9% from 13th March, 1987 till 18th December, 1998 is concerned, the said direction is clearly in violation of the law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of R.L. Jain vs. Delhi Development Authority, Reported in 2004 S.C.C. Vol. 4, Page 79. The Reference Court is not entitled to pass directions in respect of payment of interest for a period anterior to commencement of the acquisition proceedings i.e. prior to issuance of Section 4 Notification. The direction contained in Para 6 of the operative portion of the impugned Awards passed by the Reference Court, being violative of the law laid down by the Apex Court, needs to be quashed and set aside and the same are accordingly quashed and fa1239.11 7 set aside. It would be open for the claimants to initiate separate proceedings for recovery of the rental compensation, if they are legally entitled to. 6. The First Appeal Nos.1239 of 2011, 1240 of 2011 and 1241 of 2011 are accordingly allowed to the extent specified above. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to the costs. 7. In view of the disposal of the Appeals, nothing survives for consideration in the pending Civil Applications and the same are also disposed of. [R.M. BORDE, J.] asb/JULY11