RATTI RAMversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

                         [2016] 2 S.C.R. 989



                            RATTI RAM                                     A
                                  v.

               UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER
                   (Civil Appeal No. 11177 of2011)
                        FEBRUARY 17,2016                                  B

[KURIAN JOSEPH AND ROHINTON FALi NARIMAN, JJ.]
       Land Acquisilion Ac/, 1894 - s.28 - lnlerest on enhanced
compensa/ion - Statutory benefils u/s. 28 - Gran/ of - Land
acquisilion proceedings - Award passed by lhe Collector - Denial
of statu/ory benefits available under the Act lo the appel/anl-land
                                                                          c
owner, in respect of the value of land fixed - Ground for denial was
that the proceeding initialed al /he inslance of the appellanl remained
stayed before the Reference Court - Held: These are not relevant
considera/ions or factors for the purpose of grant of stalutory
benefits - There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on            D
whatever account uls. 28 - Only reference is to the date of
dispossession - Liability to pay interesl starts to run from /hat date
- Thus, the appellant shall be entitled to interest for the
compensation, as per s.28 r!w. s.23(1AJ in respecl of 1he land
acquired from him, on value at the rate of Rs. 76,5501- per Bigha
                                                                          E
for the period of slay also.
      Delhi Development Authority v. Bali Ram Sharma and
      01her (2004) 6 SCC 533 - referred to.
                        Case Law Reference
      c2004) 6 sec 533          referred to     Para 1                    F

      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 11177
of201 l.
                                WITH
      Civil Appeal No. 11178 of201 l                                      G
     From the Judgment and Order dated 27.07.2011 in RFA No. 174
of2002 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
      Ms. Shobha, Inder Singh ..\kanksha Kaushik, Shrey Dambhare,
Advs. for the Appellants.
                                                                          H
                                 989
990.               SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2016] 2 S.C.R.


 A           Vishnu B. Saharya, Viresh B. Saharya (For Mis Saharya & Co.)
       Advs. for the Respondents.
               The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
          KURIAN, J. 1. In land acquisition proceedings pertaining to
   Award No. 79 of 1982-1983 in respect of the land belonging to the
 B appellants, this Court finally fixed the land value at the rate of Rs. 76,
   5501- per Bigha, in the Judgment dated 03.08.2004 in Delhi Development
   Authority v. Bali Ra;n Sharma and Other'.
          2. Once the land value is fixed by the Court, it refers to the value
   of the land as per the Award passed by the Collector. That should carry
 C all eligible statutory benefits. It appears that in the case before us,.
   statutory benefits have been denied for a short period on the ground that
   the proceedings initiated at the instance ofthe appellants, remained stayed
   before the Reference Court. To quote from Paragraph-4 of the impugned
   judgment:
 D             "Learned Counsel for the appellant, however, had submitted
               that the learned trial court was not justified in declining the
               relief of interest on the enhanced compensation for the period
               during which the reference proceedings had remained stayed
               sine die and that relief at least should be given by this Court.
 E             However, this prayer of the appellant cannot be accepted since
               he himself had got his reference proceedings before the trial
               Court stayed sine die and the Government cannot be burdened
               with the liability of interest for the delay in disposal of the
               reference proceedings caused by the appellant himself"
.F        3. We fail to understand how the appellants could be denied the
   statutory benefits available under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
   (hereinafter referred.to as "the Act") in respect of the value of this land
   fixed, merely because there was a period of stay operating, may be in a
   proceeding at the instance of the appellants. Those are not relevant
   considerations or factors at all for the purpose of grant of statutory
 G benefits available to a person, whose land has been acquired in terms of
   Section 28 of the Act. Section 28 reads as under:
               "28. Collector may be directed to pay interest on excess·
               compensation. If the sum which, in the opinion of the Court,
               the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation is in
 H     1
           t2004) 6 sec 533
       RATTI RAM v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER                               991


       excess of the suri1 which the Collector did award as                   A
       compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the
       Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of nine
       per centum per annum from the date on which he took
       possessio.n of the land to the date of payment of such excess
       into Court:
                                                                             B
       Provided that the award of the Court may also direct that
       where such excess or any part thereof is paid into Court after
       the date of expiry of a period of one year from the date on
       which possession is taken, interest at the rate of fifteen per
       cenf.t!.l?!.Per annum shall .be payable from the date of expiry of
       the ·said period of one yearJJn the· amount of such excess or          C
       part thereof which has not been paid into Court before the
       date of such expiry. "
        4. There is no exclusion of any period contemplated on whatever
account under Section 28 of the Act. The only reference is to the date cif
dispossession. Liability to pay interest starts to run from that date.        D
Therefore, these appeals are allowed. It is directed that the appellants
shall be entitled to interest for the compensation, as per Section 28 r/w
Section 23(1A), in respect of the land acquired from the appellants, on
value at the rate of Rs. 76, 550/- per Bigha for the period of stay also,
i.e., from 24.04.1997 to 27.09.2001.                                          E
       5. We direct the Delhi Development Authority to compute the
amounts as above and deposit the same before the Executing Court
within a period of four weeks from today which shall disburse the amounts
to the appellants in accordance with faw.
       6. there shall be no order as· to costs.                               F

Nidhi Jain_                                               Appeals allowed.