C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 23.12.2011 1. C.R.No.4146 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Bagrawat and others ....Respondents 2. C.R.No.4147 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Hanuman Parshad and others ....Respondents 3. C.R.No.4148 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Ram Swaroop and others ....Respondents 4. C.R.No.4149 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Avtar Singh and others ....Respondents 5. C.R.No.4150 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Kundan and others ....Respondents 6. C.R.No.4151 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #2# Versus Ramesh Kumar and others ....Respondents 7. C.R.No.4152 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Savitri and others ....Respondents 8. C.R.No.4153 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Indrawati and others ....Respondents 9. C.R.No.4154 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Krishan Lal and others ....Respondents 10. C.R.No.4155 of 2011 Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna ....Petitioner Versus Kaur Singh and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. Vinod S Bhardwaj, Advocate for the petitioner/ Sugar Mill. Mr. G.S. Virk, Advocate. (for respondent Nos.1 to 5 in C.R.No.4146 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 to 7 in C.R.No.4147 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 in C.R.No.4148 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 & 2 in C.R.No.4149 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 & 2 in C.R.No.4151 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 to 5 in C.R.No.4154 of 2011) for respondent Nos.1 to 5 in C.R.No.4155 of 2011) Mr. G.S. Punia, Advocate. (for the respondents in C.R.No.4152 of 2011) C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #3# (for the respondents in C.R.No.4153 of 2011) Mr. S.S. Godara, Advocate. (for the respondents in C.R.No.4150 of 2011) JASWANT SINGH, J This order shall dispose of aforesaid ten Civil Revisions bearing C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 filed by the petitioner-Bhuna Co-operative Sugar Mills Bhuna against identical orders passed by the learned Executing Court in the Execution Petition filed by various land owners/claimants for payment of enhanced compensation determined by this Hon'ble Court in the Regular First Appeals. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the facts from C.R.No.4146 of 2011 have been taken for consideration. Petitioner-Mill has filed the present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution for setting aside the impugned order dated 5.2.2011 (P.5) passed by the learned Executing Court whereby the land measuring 171 kanal 9 marla belonging to Government Garden Nursery of Horticulture Department, Haryana has been put on auction for realisation of the enhanced compensation amount on account of land acquisition. Facts of the case are that the Government of Haryana acquired land of the respondents/land owners by invoking the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “Act of 1894”). The learned Collector gave an award on 1.3.1989 and thereafter a reference was made under Section 18 and the amount of compensation was enhanced and lastly the matter came to this court in RFAs and the C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #4# compensation was further re-determined and enhanced to Rs.71624.21/- per acre along with other statutory benefits vide order dated 11.11.2008. Aggrieved against the non-payment of the amount of enhanced compensation as determined in RFAs, different execution petitions were filed by the respondent/land owners and in those proceedings, learned Executing Court has passed the impugned order dated 5.2.2011 by ordering the auction of land mentioned therein for realisation of the decretal amount, hence the present petition. Shri Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the entire amount of enhanced compensation granted by this Court in RFA filed by the claimants/land owners has been deposited with the learned Executing Court along with interest upto the date of deposit i.e 31.10.2011. It is, however, contended that in view of the provision of clause (d) of Sub Section 2 of Section 107 of the Haryana Cooperative Societies Act, 1984 (for short “Act of 1984”) the interest payable would be only till the date of winding up of the petitioner-Sugar Mill i.e 19.7.2006 and therefore the prayer is that the interest component on the enhanced compensation after the date of winding up may not be ordered to be disbursed. Per contra, Sh. G.S. Punia, Advocate for respondent/land owners argues that this plea was never raised by the Sugar Mill before this Court in the RFAs decided on 11.11.2008 where the petitioner- Sugar Mill had themselves got impleaded as party and the learned First Appellate Court has granted them interest till the date of realisation of C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #5# the enhanced compensation as per provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short “Act of 1894”). He submits that the land was acquired by the Government and the execution is against the Government therefore the payment of interest till the date of realisation is the liability of the Government. It is further pointed out that the entire amount of enhanced compensation granted by this Court in RFAs filed by the claimants/land owners has been deposited with the learned Executing Court along with interest upto the date of deposit i.e 31.10.2011. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and perusing the paper book, this Court does not find any merit in the present petition and the same deserves dismissal. Before proceeding further, it is necessary to reproduce the relevant provisions of the “Act of 1894” and “Act of 1984”, which read thus: “Act of 1894” “Clause (cc) of Section 3:- the expression “corporation owned or controlled by the State” means any body corporate established by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act, and includes a Government company as defined in section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 (21 of 1860), or under any corresponding law for the time being in force in a State, being a society established or administered by Government and a co-operative society within the meaning of any law relating to co-operative societies for the time being in force in any State, being a co-operative society in which not less than fifty-one per C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #6# centum of the paid-up share capital is held by the Central Government, or by any State Government or Governments or partly by the Central Government and partly by one or more State Governments; Sub Clause (iv) of Clause (f) of Section 3: the expression “public purpose” includes: (i) to (iii) xx xx xx (iv) the provision of land for a corporation owned or controlled by the State; (v) to viii) xx xx xx Explanation-2 of Sub Section (1) of Section 6:- Where the compensation to be awarded for such property is to be paid out of the funds of a corporation owned or controlled by the State, such compensation shall be deemed to be compensation paid out of public revenues; Section 16. Power to take possession.- When the Collector has made an award under section 11, he may take possession of the land, which shall thereupon vest absolutely in the Government, free from all encumbrances. Sub Section (2) of Section 26:- Form of awards-(1) xx xx (2) Every such award shall be deemed to be a decree and the statement of the grounds of every such award a judgment within the meaning of section 2, clause (2) and section 2, clause (9), respectively, of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908); Section 53. Code of Civil Procedure to apply to proceedings before Court.- Save in so far as they may be inconsistent with anything contained in this Act, the C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #7# provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), shall apply to all proceedings before the Court under this Act. “ Act of 1984” Clause (d) of Sub Section (2) of Section 107 of Act of 1984:- Power of liquidator: (1) xx xx (2) Such liquidator shall also have powers, subject to the control of the Registrar: (a) to (c) xx xx (d) to pay claims against the co-operative society including interest upto the date of winding up according to their respective priorities, if any in full or rateably, as the assets of the society may permit, the surplus, if any, remaining after payment of the claims being applied in payment of interest from the date of such order of winding up at a rate fixed by him but exceeding the contract rate in any case;” Admittedly, the land in the present case was acquired under the provisions of Act of 1894 for a “public purpose”, namely, for establishment of Bhuna Cooperative Sugar Mill, Bhuna (for short “Sugar Mill”), a Cooperative Society registered under the provisions of Act of 1984 and as such falling within the definition of “Corporation owned or controlled by the State” within the definition of Clause (cc) of Section 3 of the Act of 1894. Thus, in view of Explanation-2 envisaged under Sub Section (1) of Section 6 of the Act of 1894 where the compensation to be awarded for the land is to be paid out of the funds of a “Corporation owned or controlled by the State”, the compensation shall be deemed to be compensation paid out of “public revenues”. C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #8# It is apparently clear that the compensation on account of acquisition of land of respondents as well as enhancement, is deemed to be a compensation to be paid out of public revenues. Further as per Section 26 (2) of the Act, 1894, every award shall be deemed to be a “decree” of the Civil Court within the meaning of Section 2, clause (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short “CPC”). Still further Section 53 of the Act of 1894 envisages that the provisions of CPC shall apply to all proceedings before the Court under the Act of 1894. It is the admitted case of the petitioner-Mill itself that the learned Executing Court has already stayed the auction proceedings qua the property belonging to the Mill vide order dated 7.6.2010 (P.4) and the warrant of attachment were issued in respect of the land measuring 171 kanal 9 marla belonging to the Provincial Government i.e Horticulture Department of the State of Haryana. In this way, the execution proceedings are going on only against the Government of Haryana and not against the petitioner-Mill. Furthermore, a perusal of order dated 4.6.2011 (P.7) passed by the learned Executing Court makes it apparently clear that pursuant to notice issued on the JD under Order 21 Rule 66 CPC, the only objection raised was/is that an application for making arithmetical correction in an order passed by this Court is pending and except this no other objection was raised before the learned Executing Court. In these circumstances, the present petitioner has even no cause of action to challenge the impugned order dated 5.2.2011 (P.5) and it is only the C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #9# Provincial Government, which is the only effected party if at all although this may not be construed to be a rider in favour of the State Government to challenge the impugned order dated 5.2.2011 (P.5). The argument that the interest payable would be only till the date of winding up of the petitioner-Mill i.e 19.7.2006 is also not tenable in view of the fact that there is a decree passed by a court of competent jurisdiction granting the benefit of interest in favour of the decree holder/respondents under the provisions of Act of 1894 and this Court cannot go behind the decree and the same is to be executed as it is unless and until it is set aside in accordance with law. The provisions of Clause (d) of Sub Section 2 of Section 107 of the Act of 1984 are only applicable if the claim (s) is/are against the Cooperative Society including interest upto the date of winding up according to their respective priorities but in the present case, there is no question of any claim against only a Cooperative Society rather the award/decree was passed against the State of Haryana and at a later stage, the petitioner-Mill got itself impleaded as party-respondent before this Court and therefore, the provisions of Section 107 are irrelevant to the matter in controversy. As a sequel to the aforesaid discussion, no interference is required by invoking the Article 227 of the Constitution. The amount of enhanced compensation along with interest deposited with the learned Executing Court shall be released to the respondent/land owners without any further delay. The lien created, if any, on the C.R.No.4146 to 4155 of 2011 #10# amount of Rs.1.48 Crores lying in the account of Registrar of this Court in terms of the interim order dated 20.7.2011 passed by this Court in the present revision petitions shall cease to have any effect. All the revision petitions are dismissed in the above terms. December 23, 2011 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE