MIRFAZEELATHHUSSAIN Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR LAND ACQUISITION HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A land acquisition proceeding which was initiated by issuing notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on 25-4-1963 has brought the appellants to this Court as they have felt dissatisfied with the fixation of a market value by the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which granted compensation on belt-wise basis. The appeal came up for hearing before a two-Judge bench and by judgments dated May 15, 1992 the appeal came to be allowed in part as indicated in the judgments. The two learned Judges, however, differed on the question as to whether the appellants are entitled to interest as enhanced by Section 18 of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 (for short,"the Amendment Act"). Kasliwal, J. took the view that despite what has been held by the Constitution Bench in the case of Union of India v. Raghubir Singh, (1989) 2 SCC 754 , enhanced rate of interest as visualised in the Amendment Act would be available to the appellants on a harmonious reading of the provisions, if the intention of the legislature in enhancing the rate of interest is kept in view. Punchhi, J., however, was of the opinion that awarding of enhanced rate on the face of what was held in Raghubir Singh's case, (supra), would militate against the ratio of that case and would do violence to the statute. The learned Judges, therefore, while allowing the appeal in part and setting aside the judgment of the High Court to the extent indicated in the judgments, requested the Hon'ble Chief Justice to constitute a larger bench to resolve the disagreement with regard to the rate of interest as, though the controversy is short, the same is likely to affect large number of cases. Hence, this appeal has come up for hearing by this bench.

(2.) The provisions of the Act which are relevant for our purpose are Sections 11, 23, 25, 26 and 28, which may be noted at the threshold:-

(3.) The aforesaid shows that the rate of interest was increased from 6 per centum to 9 which would become 15 after expiry of the period mentioned in the proviso to the Amendment Act. The question for determination is whether advantage of the increase in rate of interest would be available to the appellants. To decide this we have to keep in mind the following dates: