S. B. Sinha J. - (1.) Leave granted.
(2.) State of Orissa issued a notification purported to be under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short the Act) on or about 10-12-1980 pursuant whereto or in furtherance whereof inter alia the lands belonging to the Appellant herein were acquired. An award in respect of the said acquisition was passed on 13-9-1981 and possession of the land was taken by the State on 15-9-1981. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the quantum of compensation specified in the Award the Appellant herein filed an application for enhancement thereof in terms of Section 26 of the Act which was referred to Civil Court by the Collector on 5-12-1989. Although the amount of compensation as regard the value of the land was enhanced by an order dated 27-11-1990 by the Reference Court but the other statutory benefits in respect thereof as contemplated under Sections 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act were not granted. An appeal against the said order by the State was dismissed by the High Court. The Appellant filed an application for enhancement of payment of solatium @ 30% being MJC No.43/89 which was allowed by an order dated 21-12-1990.
(3.) The Appellant filed an application for amendment for grant of benefit under Section 28 of the Act which was allowed by the Reference Court in terms of an order dated 30th July, 1993. On the same day, the Appellant herein filed another application purported to be under Section 151 read with Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure as also Order 47, Rule 1 thereof for review of the judgment and decree as also for necessary clarification therein as regard non-awarding of benefits under Sections 23(1A) and 23(2) of the Act. The said application was opposed by the Respondent herein. The Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Gunupur by reason of a judgment and order dated 8-10-1996 upon consideration of the contentions raised by the parties in details as also the relevant provisions of the Act held : "I have already, discussed above that vide order dated 30-7-93 in MJC No.14/91 though, in para 3 last sentence it was mentioned that the above decrees were set aside but that is a mistake caused inadvertently because, in para 4 it is clearly mentioned that the above judgment and decree were corrected and in the ordering petition also the word correction has been mentioned by deleting a portion of previous award and in that place substituting some other words as mentioned in the order and the judgment and the decree dated 27-11-90. In view of the different provisions of Land Acquisition Act, mentioned above and relying on the above mentioned decisions, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner is entitled to an amount of 12% interest p.a. from the date of notification u/S. 4(1) of the Act till the date of dispossession. As per the provisions of Sec. 23(1)(A), he is also entitled to solatium @ 30% on the market value of the land in accordance with Sec. 23(2) of the Act and the interest at the enhanced rate in view of the Sec. 2 of the Act as amended by Act 68 of 1984, as per the decision of our own High Court reported in Vol. 81(1996) CLT page 408 (supra). Hence it is necessary to correct the decree accordingly, exercising power under Sec. 152, CPC and invoking the inherent power under Section 151, CPC the order/decree is corrected as follows : The rate of solatium at mentioned in the decree should be corrected as 30% instead of 15%. The portion inserted in the order/decree as per order dated 30-7-93 be corrected as follows : The Collector is directed to pay interest on such excess amount at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess and the petitioner is also entitled to interest @ 15% p.a. from the date of expiry of the said period of one year as per Sec.28 of the Act, 1984 as amended by Sec. 68 of the Act, 1984." ;