C.R. No. 3200 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 3200 of 2010 Date of Decision: 16.11.2010 National Fertilizers Limited .... Petitioner Versus Vinay Kumar Kapoor and others ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK SINGH Present : Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the petitioner 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? ALOK SINGH, J. (ORAL) Present petition is filed challenging order dated 13.2.2010 passed by Addl. District Judge, Karnal thereby rejecting the application of the petitioner for payment of interest on the excess amount paid by the petitioner to the farmers/respondents. The brief facts of the present case are that lands of the respondents were acquired under the provisions of Land Acquisition Act way back in the year 1973. Respondents were paid compensation, solatium and interest as directed by the Reference Court and Appellate Court. However, in an appeal Hon'ble Apex Court has directed that respondents are not entitled for the interest on the solatium and the interest paid under Section 23(1-A) of the Act. After the judgment of the Apex Court dated 29.11.1995 petitioner herein moved an application under Section 144 CPC before the Court below for refund of the excess amount paid to the C.R. No. 3200 of 2010 2 farmers. Learned Court below vide order dated 20.10.2009 directed refund of the excess amount in favour of the petitioner. However, learned Court below while passing order dated 20.10.2009 did not make any provision therein to pay interest on the excess amount to be recovered by the petitioner for the period amount remained unpaid. Thereafter, entire amount was paid by the respondents to the petitioner. Petitioner, thereafter, moved an application in question before the Court below requesting the Court below to direct the respondents to pay the interest on the excess amount for the period it remains unpaid. Learned Court below vide impugned order dated 13.2.2010 rejected the application of the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved impugned order dated 13.2.2010 petitioner has invoked supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and having perused the record, I am of the opinion that supervisory jurisdiction of this Court ordinarily should not be invoked unless and until manifest error of law or jurisdictional error which amount to vitiating the entire proceedings is pointed out. Not only this while disposing of the application under Section 144 CPC learned Court below vide order dated 20.10.2009 did not direct payment of interest on the amount to be refunded. Order dated 20.10.2009 was not challenged by either of the party before the superior Court and ultimately order dated 20.10.2009 attained finality. Thereafter, petitioner moved an application before the Court below for direction to pay the interest on the amount to be refunded which was C.R. No. 3200 of 2010 3 dismissed by the Court below on the ground that order dated 20.10.2009 has attained finality, hence, now payment of interest can not be directed on the miscellaneous application. In the opinion of this Court, Executing Court can not go beyond the decree. Undisputedly, in the present matter while allowing application under Section 144 CPC vide judgment dated 20.10.2009, no provision was made to make payment on the excess amount for the period amount remained with the respondents. Hence, in the opinion of this Court, Court below while executing order dated 20.10.2009 was not competent to make provision for the payment of interest. I do not find any illegality or jurisdictional error in the impugned order. Petition is dismissed. (ALOK SINGH) 16.11.2010 JUDGE reena