IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 CRP.No. 404 of 2009 (E) --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 6.7.2009 IN EP 266/98 IN LAR.69/1986 of PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, PALAKKAD .................... REVN. PETITIONER/JUDGMENT DEBTOR/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, L.A.(G) NO.II, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.K.RAVIKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/DECREE HOLDERS/CLAIMANTS: --------------------------------------- 1. PARVATHY AMMAL, W/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR (DIED) 2. KANAKARAJ, S/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 3. NATARAJ, S/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 4. VARADARAJ, S/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 5. THANDAVARIYIL, S/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 6. DANABHAGYAM, D/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 7. JAYALAKSHMI, D/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR 8. PASUPATHY, S/O.KANTHASWAMY PILLAI, NELLIMEDU, CHITTUR ADV. MR.G.SHRIKUMAR FOR R2 TO 8 MR.SREEJITH S.NAIR FOR R2 TO 8 THIS CIVIL REVISION PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRP.No. 404 of 2009 (E) ORDER ON I.A.NO.1998/2009 IN C.R.P.NO.404/2009 DISMISSED. 26.11.2009 SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. // TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E --------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of November, 2009 O R D E R Revision is filed by the State against the order dated 6.7.2009 in E.P.No.266 of 1998 in L.A.R.No.69 of 1986 passed by the learned Sub Judge, Palakkad. On the basis of the statements filed by both sides as to what exactly is the amount due under the decree, after enquiry, the execution court passed an order that a sum of Rs.7,73,201/- is due to the decree holder. During the pendency of the execution proceedings some of the movables belonging to the State had been attached and produced before the court, but, later they were released on bond. Under the impugned order the court has further ordered that the movables so attached are liable to be sold for realisation of the decree debt. Questioning the correctness of the conclusion made and the amount ordered to be realised under the decree and also impeaching the propriety of the order as vitiated by jurisdictional infirmity the State has preferred this revision. C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 2 2. After hearing the counsel on both sides at length, I directed them to file statement to determine as to what exactly is the amount due under the decree to the decree holder. The concerned officer from the Revenue Department was also summoned to appear before the Court to finalise what is the amount due to the decree holder under the decree so that a quietus can be given to the whole controversy. After the statements were filed by both sides and scrutinising them the learned Government Pleader submitted that the statement filed by the decree holder on 16.11.2009 to a large extent can be accepted and the limited dispute which the State would like to canvass is only with respect to the claim for interest made by the decree holder on the balance amount due from 12.9.2001. To have an effective appreciation as to the calculation shown in the statement arrived at in the statement referred to above it would be profitable to reproduce the statement: General Information Section 3(1) notification : 29.05.1984 Date of Award No.12/86 by LAO : 30.05.1986 Date of dispossession : 29.05.1986 C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 3 Date of judgment in L.A.R.No.69/86, Sub Court, Palakkad : 11.04.1990 Enhanced value as per judgment in L.A.R.No.69/86 : Rs.4,86,720.00 Amount already paid by LAO : Rs.2,86,486.00 Quantum of enhancement given by LAR Court : Rs.2,00,234.00 30% Solatium on Rs.2,00,234 : Rs.60,070.00 12% Additional compensation for enhanced amount (i.e.Rs.200234) from 29.05.1984 (date of notification) to 29.05.86 (date of award)(731 days): Rs.48,122.00 9% interest on Rs.200234/- from 30.05.86 to 30.05.87 (one year) : Rs.18,021.00 15% interest 30.05.87 to 3.10.90 (1223 days) : Rs.1,00,638.00 Total as on 3.10.1990 : Rs.4,27,085.00 Amount deposited on 4.10.1990 : Rs.4,62,294.00 Excess deposit : Rs.35,209.00 Enhancement awarded by Hon'ble High Court in L.A.A.No.137/91 dated 3.4.1998 : Rs.6,84,450.00 LAR Award Amount : Rs.4,86,720.00 C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 4 Quantum of Enhancement by High Court : Rs.1,97,730.00 30% solatium on Rs.1,97,730/- : Rs.59,319.00 12% Additional compensation on Rs.1,97,730/- (enhanced compensation) from 29.5.1984 (date of notification) to 29.5.1986 (date of award) : Rs.47,520.00 9% interest on Rs.1,97,730/- from 30.05.86 to 29.05.87 (one year) : Rs.17,796.00 15% interest on Rs.1,97,730/- from 30.05.87 to 11.09.2001 (5218 days) : Rs.4,24,009.00 Total due as on 12.09.2001 : Rs.7,46,374.00 Deposit on 12.09.2001 : Rs.3,86,534.00 Balance outstanding as on 12.09.01: Rs.3,59,840.00 Reduce excess deposit : Rs.35,209.00 New Balance as on 12.09.2001 : Rs.3,24,639.00 15% interest on Rs.1,97,730/- from 12.09.2001 to 2.7.08 (2483 days) : Rs.2,01,765.00 Total as on 2.07.08 : Rs.5,26,396.00 Amount deposited on 2.7.08 : Rs.2,66,826.00 Balance as on 2.7.08 : Rs.2,59,570.00 15% interest on Rs.1,97,730/- from 3.7.08 to 16.11.09 (501 days) : Rs.40,710.00 Total outstanding as on 16.11.2009: Rs.3,00,280.00 ========== C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 5 Up to the calculation made arriving the balance as on 12.9.2001 it is stated that there is no dispute. The learned Government Pleader submitted that on the balance amount found due on 12.9.2001, that is a sum of Rs.Rs.3,24,639.00, the decree holder is not entitled to claim any further interest. Whatever amount given by way of enhanced compensation by virtue of the decree passed in the LA Appeal had already been deposited even before that date and the outstanding amount arrived on 12.9.2001, according to the learned Government Pleader, can only be treated as interest. 3. The enhanced compensation awarded in appeal by this Court is Rs.1,97,730/-. The argument canvassed by the learned Government that the principal amount awarded as enhanced compensation stood exhausted on 12.9.2001 cannot be accepted since the balance amount as on that date is more than the enhanced compensation awarded by the court. How appropriation has to be made in respect of compensation awarded under the Land Acquisition proceedings has been considered by the apex Court in Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India (2006 KHC 1608). A Constitutional Bench of the Apex C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 6 Court was constituted to resolve the controversy then prevailing over conflicting decisions decided earlier as regard the entitlement of the claimants for interest on the solatium awarded as compensation. The Apex Court resolving that issue also considered the mode of appropriation to be followed in respect of the compensation deposited before the court from time to time. The Apex Court has laid down the principle of appropriation applicable stating that the decree holder may be entitled to apply the rule of appropriation by appropriating the amount first towards the interest, then towards the costs and then towards the principal amount due under the decree. In paragraph 28 of the judgment dilating those aspects further the apex court has observed as follows: “28. Going by this principle and for the moment keeping out the scheme of the Land Acquisition Act, it appears to us that on payment or deposit of the amount awarded by the Collector in terms of S.11 read with S.31 of the Act, the claimant cannot thereafter claim any interest on that part of the compensation paid to him or deposited for the payment to him once notice of deposit is given to him. Thereafter, when the Reference Court enhances C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 7 the compensation with consequential enhancement in solatium and interest under S.23(1A) of the Act and further awards interest on the enhanced compensation in terms of S.28 of the Act, the claimant/decree holder can seek an appropriation of the amounts deposited pursuant to that award - decree, only towards the enhanced amount so awarded by the Reference Court. While making the appropriation, he can apply the amount deposited, first towards the satisfaction of his claim towards interest on the enhanced amount, the costs, if any, awarded and the balance towards the land value, solatium and the payment under S.23(1A) of the Act and if there is a shortfall, claim that part of the compensation with interest thereon as provided in S.28 of the Act and as covered by the award - decree. Once the sum enhanced by the Reference Court, along with the interest is deposited by the State, there will be no occasion for the claimant/awardee to seek a reopening of the amount awarded by the Collector, substituted by the amount awarded by the Reference Court and seek to have a reappropriation of the amount towards what is due. Same would be the position in a case where the amount awarded by the Reference Court, including the interest is deposited, but the amount is further enhanced in appeal by the High Court. Again, the same principle C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 8 would apply. The principle would continue to apply when the Supreme Court awards further enhancement in a further appeal to that Court. But if after the award by the Reference Court, the amount is not deposited by the State, interest would run on the compensation in terms of S.28 of the Act on that amount as provided in S.28. The same would be the position regarding the enhancement given in appeal by the High Court and in the enhancement given in appeal by the Supreme Court. The mandate of S.34 and S.28 that interest would run from the date the Collector takes possession till the particular amount is deposited as provided in those sections, ensures that the claimant is recompensed adequately. S.28 ensures such recompense at each stage of enhancement of compensation.” So much so as on 12.9.2001 the balance amount due to the decree holder being Rs.3,24,639/- which was in excess of the principal amount due as enhanced compensation i.e., Rs.1,97,730/-, and no point of time earlier that principal amount had been reduced by payment or deposit the decree holder is entitled to claim interest on the principal amount of Rs.1,97,730/- from the above date as well till the entire interest on the amount is exhausted. Learned Government Pleader C.R.P.No.404 of 2009 - E 9 submitted that if the appropriation is made in the light of the decision rendered above there cannot be any further quarrel with respect to the statement filed by the decree holder. So much so, it follows that the outstanding amount due from the State as on 16.11.2009 recognising the deposit of Rs.2,66,826/- State had deposited on 2.7.2008 will be Rs.3,00,280/-. So there will be a direction to the State to deposit Rs.3,00,280/- before the execution court within one month from the date of this order. The execution court shall also release the amount of Rs.2,66,826/- which had been deposited by the State on 2.7.2008 to the respondents/decree holder provided there is no charge, attachment or other liability interdicting such release. Revision is disposed of as above. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-