THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.959 of 2000 ORDER: Petitioners herein, who are claimants seeking enhancement of compensation under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, are the petitioners in O.P.No.570 of 1990 before the learned District Judge, Medak. The said reference was registered in 1990 and was coming up for evidence on behalf of the petitioners. But as the petitioners failed to adduce any evidence, the learned District Judge closed the O.P.on 05.07.1994. Thereafter, claimants/petitioners herein filed I.A.No.813 of 1994 seeking restoration of O.P. with a liberty to them to adduce evidence. That application was opposed by the respondent/State and the court below while deciding the said application noticed that inspite of several adjournments from 1990 to 1994 the claimants did not adduce evidence and ultimately the O.P. was closed in the year 1994. Thereafter restoration application was filed, which also underwent several adjournments for four years. The District Judge therefore felt that even if a liberty is to be granted to the petitioners to adduce evidence, they cannot be further benefited by grant of interest at 15% per annum for the period during which the O.P. remained under dismissal. Consequently, the court below restored the O.P. giving liberty, but the interest from 05.07.1994 to 31.01.1998 i.e. the date on which the O.P. was restored, was disallowed. Following the said order, subsequently, the O.P. itself was heard and disposed of by the learned District Judge on merits by granting compensation at Rs.10,000/- per acre, vide orders dated 18.01.1999. Against the said decree, some of the claimants filed A.S.No.1475 of 1999 and this Court while noticing the aforesaid order of the learned District Judge disallowing the interest during the period as above marginally enhanced the compensation so as to offset the loss of interest for 4½ years and allowed the said appeal by enhancing compensation to Rs.11,000/- per acre. During the pendency of that first appeal, the present C.R.P. is filed to the extent of questioning the order of the learned District Judge restoring the O.P., but without entitlement of the claimants to interest from 05.07.1994 to 31.01.1998. The facts of the case and particularly the judgment of this Court while disposing of A.S.No.1475 of 1999 dated 11.08.2006 shows that enhancement by further Rs.1000/- was granted only to offset the loss of interest and in view of that the relief to the claimants was already granted to that extent. Even otherwise allowing the O.P. to be dismissed for default and then seeking restoration after lapse of several years should not be at the peril of the state. While the petitioners were granted indulgence of restoration of O.P., a premium cannot be put on their default by allowing them interest also for the default period. In the circumstances, therefore, the impugned order is well justified and warrants no interference in this revision. Civil Revision Petition is accordingly dismissed. No costs. _____________________ VILAS V.AFZULPURKAR, J. 8th June 2011 Rns.