Amit Rawal, J. - (1.) The petitioner(s)-Electricity Board are aggrieved of the impugned order dated 19.09.2014, whereby objection of the petitionerJudgment Debtor vis-a-vis the execution of the judgment and decree dated 10.03.2010 passed by the Reference Court enhancing the amount of compensation at the rate of Rs.8,00,000/- per acre with interest at the rate of 12% p.a. along with solatium at the rate of 30% p.a. + permissive clauses of Section 23(1)A of the Land Acquisition Act, has been decreed in favour of Decree Holder.
(2.) Mr. J.P.S. Sandhu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners submits that award of the Reference Court has been complied in toto. There is no illegality and perversity. The Decree Holder is unnecessarily realizing the amount towards interest instead of apportioning of principle interest which is not in accordance with the ratio decidendi culled out by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India, 2008 2 RCR(Civ) 207. The executing Court has not taken into consideration the calculation submitted and had arrived at erroneous findings calling upon them to pay a sum of Rs.11,40,546/- as on 31.08.2014, thus, order under challenge is not sustainable in the eyes of law.
(3.) Mr. Amandeep Chabra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondents submits that order under challenge is perfect, legal and justified. There is no illegality and perversity. Electricity Board has not deposited the amount on time and therefore interest kept on increasing and only amount of Rs.11,76,000/- was deposited whereas it burgeoned to Rs.21,18,600/-, therefore, order is as per record.;