HOSHIARPUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST Vs. PRESIDENT LAND ACQUISITION TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE land of respondents Nos. 2 and 3 was acquired by the Improvement Trust, Hoshiarpur, in order to carry out the development scheme framed by it. Initially, the scheme was for 40. 93 Acres of land situated in the locality known as Premgarh in the revenue estate of Hoshiarpur. Sub-sequently, the total area was measured as 346 Kanals 7 Marias. Notification under Section 42 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 was issued on 16. 1. 1978. Thereafter an award was made by the Land Acquisition Collector on 6. 1. 1979. A supplementary award was passed by the Land Acquisition Collector on 21. 2. 1979. Another supplementary award was made by him on 30. 7. 1979. The land owners filed applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 59 of the Punjab Town Improvement Act, 1922 (for short 'the 1922 Act' ). These applications were decided by the Land Acquisition Tribunal (Improvement Trust Hoshiarpur) on 17. 3. 1983 vide order (Annexure P. 1 ). After about 11 years of the passing of the order (Annexure PI) the landowners (respondents Nos. 2 and 3) filed an application under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure for correction of the order dated 17. 3. 1983 and by the impugned order the Tribunal has directed that the claimants shall be entitled to payment of solatium at the rate of 30 per cent of the market value and interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum on the enhanced amount of compensation for the first year and at the rate of 15 per cent for the subsequent period till the realisation of the enhanced amount.

(2.) ALTHOUGH in the writ petition the impugned order has also been challenged on the ground that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 are not applicable to the acquisition of lands under the Punjab Town Improvement Act, during the course of arguments learned counsel appearing for the petitioner did not press this point and, therefore, we do not consider it necessary to deal with the objection of the petitioner regarding the non-applicability of the provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short 'the 1894 Act' ).

(3.) SHRI G. S. Jaiswal, appearing for the respondents Nos. 2 and 3, supported the impugned order by arguing that the claimants were entitled to compensation under Section 23 (1a) of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984. He relied on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in The Jalandhar Improvement Trust v. Daljinder Singh and Ors. , 1992 P. L. J. 520.