UMED INDUSTRIES AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. AND ORS.versusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

-A                      UMED INDUSTRIES AND
                    LANDDEVELOPMENT CO. AND ORS.
                                          v.
                      STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

                                JANUARY 17, 1995
B
         [K. RAMASWAMY AND MRS. SUJATA V. MANOHAR, JJ.)

           Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959-Section 60- A-Transitory
     provisions for pending matters relating to acquisition of land-Amount of
C    compensation or interest or that payable for any other reason-Payable in
     accordance with provisions of Land Acquisition Act, 1894-Entitlement only
     from date of commencement of Act.

            The notification u/s 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act,
     1959 was published acquiring land for urban development. Possession of
D    the land was taken. The Additional Collector determined the market value.
     Appeal u/s 54 of the Act was filed by the claimants claiming additional         1..

     amount of compensation and also solatium and interest. The Government
     also filed appeals against the order of the Collector awarding 10% interest.
     The District Judge by his decree dated 9.2.1983 determined the compensa-
E    tion and reduced the interest. Revision filed against this judgment was
     dismissed. This appeal had been filed agai~st the order made in revision.

            It was contended by the appellants that the provisions of Sec. 52(2)
     and 53(6) (a) were inconsistent with the provisions of the Land Acquisition
     (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984 amending the principal Land Acquisition Act
F    1 of 1984 and therefore the provisions of Sec. 52(2) and 53(6) (a) were void.
     The appellants were not permitted to agitate this question as this conten·
     tion though raised before the District Judge was not pursued before the
     High Court.

           Disposing of the matter, this Court
G
           HELD: 1.1. A reading of transitory provisions in Sec. 60- A of the
     Rajasthan Urban Improvement Act, 1959 would make the legislative ipten-
     tion clear that any action taken, done or made under and in accordance
     with the provisions of the Act as it stood before the date of commencement
H    of the Central Amendment Act 68 of 1984, such action, thing or order shall
                                          348
           UMED INDS. AND LAND DEV. CO. v. STATE OF RAJ.             349

not be reopened or reviewed or be liable to be challenged on the ground A
that such action, thing or order was at variance with that provided in the
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Central Act l of 1894) subject, however, that
any further proceeding, action or order in such matter conducted, taken
or made on or after the date of commencement shall subject to the other
provisions of this section, namely, section 60-A, be made under and ac-
cordance with the Land Acquisition Act. Sub-sec. (2) also makes the matter
                                                                           B
very clear; namely, the amount of compensation or interest or that payable
for any other reason shall, in a matter pending on the date or commence.
ment, be payable under and in accordance with the provisions of the Land
Acquisition Act (Central Act) and the money paid prior to the date o(
commencement shall be deducted from or adjusted against the said            c
amount. It was applied to pending appeals. Thereby, it is amply clear that
the amount of compensation or interest or that payable for any other
reason (solatium under the Central Act) shall be in accordance with the
provisions of the Land Acquisition Act. But their entitlement will be only
from the date of commencement of the Act but, not anterior thereto.
                                                                           D
                                                                 (352-C-F]
      1.2. Section 52(2) provides payment of simple interest at 6% per
annum on the amount of compensation determined under sec. 53. Sec
53(6)(a) specifically omits to pay solatium for compulsory acquisition.
Thereby, prior to the commencement of the Central Act 68 of 1984, namely,   E
September 24, 1984, the claimants were not entitled to solatium. (353-G]

        1.3. Since the award was made by the District Court on 9.2.83 i.e.
prior to the commencement of the Amendment Act, the claimants were not
entitled to solatium @ 30%. However, since the proceedings were pending,
they were entitled to payment of solatium at 15% from the date of com- F
mencement of the Act, namely, 1-8-1987 till date of payment on the en-
hanced compensation awarded by the District Court. As regards interest
till the State Amendment Act had been operating till 1.1.1987 the claimants
were entitled to interest under the Central Amendment Act only on and
from 1.9.87 on the enhanced market value for one year from 1.8.1987. G
Therefore, after expiry of one year till date of payment or deposit, the
claimants were entitled to interest at 15% on the enhanced compensation.
                                                               [353-A-C]
        CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1299 of
1988.                                                                       J:l
    350                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  (1995) 1 S.C.R.

A        From the Judgment and Order dated 22.7.87 of the Rajasthan High
    Court in S.B.C.R.P. No. 498 of 1983.

          B.B. Beri and Indra Makwana for the Appellants.

          B.D Sharma for the Respondents.
B
          The following Order of the Court was delivered :

          This appeal, by special leave, arises from the Judgment of the learned
    Single Judge of the High Court of Rajasthan, dated 22.7.1987 made in
    ReVision No. 265 of 1983 and batch.
c
         The Notification under Section 52 of the Rajasthan Urban Improve-
  ment Act, 1959, for short the Act, was published in the State Gazette on
  10.10.1974 acquiring an extent of 39875 acres of land for Urban develop-
  ment. Possession of the land was taken onl0.10.1974. Though the appellant
D had claimed larger amount, the additional Collector in his Award dated
  18.4.1980 determined the market value @ Rs. 13.50 per sq.yd. Feeling
  aggrieved, the appellant carried the matter in appeal under Section 54 of
  the Act claiming additional amount of compensation and also solatium and
  interest. The Government also filed appeals against the order of the
E Collector awarding 10% interest. The District Judge by his common award
  and decree dated 9.2.1983 determined the compensation@ Rs. 49.50 per
  sq.yd. and reduced the interest from 10% to 6% from October 10, 1974.
  Still further aggrieved the appellants carried the matter in revision to the
  High Court. The appellants' revision is 498/83, the High Court by a
  common judgment dismissed the revision petitions as stated earlier on
F 22.7.1984. Thus this appeal.

          The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellants
  is that the provisions of Sec.52(2) and 53(6) (a) are inconsistent with the·
  provisions of the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 68 of 1984 amending
  the principal Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 and that therefore the
G provisions of Sec. 52(2) and 53(6) (a) are void. Unfortunately, this conten-
  tion, though was raised before the District Judge, was not pursued before
  the High Court nor any independent proceedings have been taken chal-
  lenging the constitutionality of the provisions referred to hereinbefore.
  Therefore,. we cannot permit the appellants to agitate this question for the
H first time in this appeal. However, the State Legislature, after the Central
               UMED INDS. AND LAND DEV. CO. v. STATE OF RAJ.                 351

      Act 68 of 1984 has come into force, has taken. care to amend the provisions   A
      of the Act and the relevant provisions in the Rajasthan Land Acquisition
    · Act, 1953 as applicable to the State by appropriate amendments. As regard
      the Act is concerned, the Legislature amended the same by State Amend-
      ment Act 29 of 1987 which came into force w.e.f. 1.8.1987. Therein the Act
      has taken care of transitory provision in Sec. 60-A of the Act which reads
                                                                                    B
      thus:

                  "60-A. Transitory provisions for pending matters relating to
              acquisition of land. ----(1) Notwithstanding anything otherwise
              contained in sub-section (1) of Section 52, where in any matter
              relating to the acquisition of land pending on the date of commen- C
              cement of the Rajasthan Urban Improvement (Amendment) Or-
              dinance, 1987 (hereinafter in this section referred to as the date
              of commencement), an action, thing or order has been taken, done
              or made under and in accordance with the provisions of this Act
              as it stood before the date of commencement such action, thing or
              order shall not be reopened or reviewed or be liable to be chal- D
              lenged on the ground that such action, thing or order was at
              variance with that provided in the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
              (Central Act 1 of 1894) (hereinafter in this section referred to as
              the Land Acquisition Act) subject, however, that any further
              proceeding, action or order in such matter conducted, taken or' E
              made on or after the date of commencement shall subject to the
              other provisions of this section, be made under and in accordance
              with the Land Acquisition Act.

                  (2) The amount of compensation or interest or that payable for
)             any other reason shall, in a matter pending on the date of com-       F
              mencement, be payable under and in accordance with the
              provisions of the Land Acquisition Act and the money paid prior
              to the date of commencement shall be deducted from or adjusted

-             against the said amount.

                 (3) & ( 4) x x    x   x    x   x
                                                                                    G

                  (5) In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded
              in a matter pending on the date of commencement, the market
              value of the land at the date on which the notice was published in
              the official Gazette under Clause (b) of sub-section (6) of section H
      352                 SUPREME COURT REPORTS                 [1995) 1 S.C.R.

!\_          53, as it stood before the date of commencement, shall be. taken
            ·into consideration.

                (6) An appea! filed under section 54 or section 56 or a dispute
            refr:-red under Section 55 or section 59 and pending· on the date
            of commencement shall be decided having regard to the provisions
B           of the Land Acquisition Act."

   A reading thereof would make the legislative intention clear that any action
   taken, done or made under and in accordance with the provisions of the
   Act as it stood before the date of commencement of the Central Amend-
   ment Act 68 of 84, such action, thing or order shall not be reopened or
C reviewed or be liable to be challenged on the ground that such action, thing
   or order was at variance with that provided in the Land Acquisition Act,
  .1894 (Central Act 1of1894) subject, however, that any further proceeding,
   action or order in such matter conducted, taken or made on or after the
   date of commencement shall subject to the other provisions of this section,
D namely, section 60-A, be made under and accordance with the L.A. Act.
   Sub-sec.(2) also makes the matter very clear, namely, the amount of
   compensation or interest or that payable for any other reason shall, in a
   matter pending on the date of commencement, be payable under and in
   accordance with the provisions of the L.A. Act (Central Act) and the
   money paid prior to the date of commencement shall be deducted from or
E adjusted against the said amount. It was applied to pending appeals.
   Thereby, it is amply clear that the amount of compensation or interest or
   that payable for any other reason (solatium under the Central Act) shall
   be in accordance with the provision~ of the L.A. Act. F•:t entitlement will
   be only from the date of commencement of the Act but, not anterior
   thereto.
F
        Section 52(2) proVides payment of simple interest at 6% per annum
  on the amount of compensation determined under under sec.53. Sec.
  53(6)(a) specifically omits to pay solatium for compulsory acquisition.
  Thereby, prior to the commencement of the Central Act 68 of 1984, namely
G September 24, 1984, the claimants are not entitled to solatium.
         In Union of India v. Raghubir Singh & Ors., [1989) 3 SCR 316, a
  Constitution Bench of this Court has held that in proceedings pending
  before the date of the introduction of the Amendment Act and the date of
  the commencement of the Amendment Act either before the Land Ac-
H quisition Officor or before the reference Court enhanced solatium would
               UMED INDS. AND LAND D.EV. CO. v. STATE OF RAJ.                  353

      be payable. In view of the fact that the Award was made by the District A
      Court on 9.2.83 i.e. prior to the commencement of the Amendment Act,
      the claimants are not entitled to solatium @ 30%. However, since the
      proceedings are pending, they are entitled to payment of solatium at 15%
      from the ·date of commencement of the Act, namely, 1-8-1987 till date of
      payment on the enhanced compensation ciWarded by the District Court. As
      regards interest is concerned, till the State Amendment Act has been
                                                                                 B
      operating till 1.1.1987 the claimants are entitled to interest under the
      Central Amendment Act only on and from 1.9.87 on the enhanced com-
      pensation at 9% -per annum on the enhanced market value for one year
      from 1.8.1987. Therefore, after expiry of one year till date of payment or
      deposit, the claimants are entitled to interest at 15% on the enhanced c
      co_mpensation. With regard to additional amount under s.23(1-A) this
      Court in KS. Paripooman v. State of Kera/a, [1994] 5 SCC 593 held that
...   the claimants would not be entitled to the additional amount, if the
      proceeding were not pending before the Civil Court as on the date of the
      commencement of Central Amendment Act. Since the Amendment Act D
      was made applicable only on 1.8.1987, the claimants also are not entitled
      to the additional amount u/s 23(1-A)

             The appeal is allowed only to the above extent. But in the circumstan-
      ces, the parties are directed to bear their own costs.

                                                                  Appeal allowed.
                                                                                      E
      A.G.