- (1.) R. K. Mahajan, J. This appeal is covered by the judgment dated 5-2-1993 rendered by Hon'ble P. P. Gupta, J. in First Appeal No'. 808 of 1984, Rajendra Kumar v. State of U. P. as the purpose is same and notification is same.
(2.) THE respondent No. 3 Om Prakash, who is brother of appellant Ram Nath, has died during the pendency of the appeal. A substitution application for bringing his heirs on record was filed which was allowed. An application under Order 1, Rule 10 C. P. C. was filed with the prayer that the respondent No. 3/1 to 3/6 (the heirs of respondent No. 3) be transposed as appel lants in the appeal. THE said application is allowed. The grievance of the learned Coun sel for the appellant is that before the Spe cial Land Acquisition Officer, he claimed the rate at Rs. 10 but at the time of filing of appeal, he confined his claim to Rs. 8 only. He wants to make amendment in the memo of appeal on the ground that the persons situated similarly have been given the rate at Rs. 9. He further submitted that the appel lants are illiterate and were not aware about the technicality. Since the amount has been increased by the appellate court after the enforcement of the Land Acquisition Act, 1984 and the petitioner is entitled to get solatium @ 15% per annum on the enhanced compensation and interest @ 9% from the date of posses sion to the date of payment. This is fully covered by the decision in the case of AT. 5. Paripoornan v. State of Kerala and others reported in 1995 SC 581 wherein it was observed as under: ". . . . . . . The restricted interpretation would not be understood to mean that Section 23 (2) would not apply to the awarded decree of the civil court pending at the time when the Act has come into force or thereafter. In the instant case, the award of the civil court was after the Act has come into force, namely, February 28,1985. Therefore, if the sum which, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as a compensa tion, is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the court shall direct to pay interest on such excess at the rate of 9% per annum from the date on which the Collector took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess into the Court. By operation of the proviso, if such excess or any part thereof is paid into the Court after the date of expiry of a period of one year from the date on which compensation is taken, interest at the rate of 15% per annum shall be payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year on the amount of such excess or part thereof which has not been paid into the Court before the date of such expiry. Accordingly, the appellant claimant would be entitled to the enhanced interest @ 9% from the date of taking possession, for one year @ 9% and thereafter @ 15% till the date of the deposit made by the Collector. "
(3.) 1 allow the amendment in the memo of appeal. The appellants are directed to get compensation at the rate of Rs. 9/ per sq. yard, the appellants are directed to the req uisite court fee on the difference of Rs. 1 as they claimed Rs. 8 and now they are getting at the rate of Rs. 9, within two months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order before the authority concerned. 6. The appeal is disposed of accor dingly. Appeal disposed of. .;