THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICERversusSIDDAPPA UJANAPPA MADAR

A               THE SPECIAL LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER
                                          v.
                        SIDDAPPA UJANAPPA IVIADAR

                               NOVEMBER 2, 1995

B                [K. RAMASWAMY AND B.L. HANSARIA, JJ.]

            Land Acquisition Act, 1894:

        Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 as amended by the Amendment Act,
C   19M-Applicability of

         The applicability of the provisions of Ss.23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the
    Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act 1984 was in question in these appeals.

            Allowing the appeal, this Court
D         HELD : The controversy in this appeal is no longer res integra, as the
    points are already covered by the Constitution Bench decisions of this
    Court.* Consequently, the benefits granted pursuant to the Amendment Act
    stand set aside. The respondents are entitled to interest @6% per annum
    and also solatium @15% on the enhanced compensation. [749-C-D]
E
          *Union of India v. Raghubir Singh, [1989] 3 SCR 316 and KS.
    Paripooman v. State of Kera/a, [1994] 5 SCC 593, followed.

            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 10522 of
    1995.
F
         From the Judgment and Order dated 26.5.87 of the Karnataka High
    Court in M.S.A. No. 79 of 1987.

            M. Vcerappa for the Appellant.

G           Kiran Suri for the Respondent.

            The following Order of the Court was delivered :

          The Registry's report dated August 14, 1995 indicates that S.S. Typai,
    the sole respondent in SLP (C) No. 9906 of 1987 (present SLP),was dead
H   as per the postal endorsement. We, therefore, directed the learned counsel
                                          748                                      •·
                        SPL. LANDACQN. OFFICER v. S.U. MADAR                     74Y

       for the petitioner-State to take steps to bring on record the legal repre-       A
       sentatives of the sole- respondent. The Special Land Acquisition Officer,
       National Highways, Dharwad, in his letter dated 17th October, 1995 had
       stated that said S.S. Tyapi is still alive and he is presently running a tea
       shop near bus depot at Gangavati. Under these circumstances, the vostal
       endorsement obviously is incorrect. Therefore, there is no need to bring         B
       the legal representatives of the respondent on recorcl.

                Leave granted.

             The controversy in case is not longer res intergra. The applicability of
       the provisions of Sections 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 of the Land Acquisition         C
       Act, 1894, as amended by the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act (Act 68
       of 1984), is in question in this matter. These points have already been
       covered by two Constitution Bench decisions of this Court in Union of
       India v. Raghubir Singh, [1989] 3 SCR 316 and K.S. Paripooman v. State of
       Kera/a, [1994] 5 SCC 593. In view of these Constitution Bench judgments
       the appeal is to be allowed. Consequently, the benefits granted· pursuant        D
       to the Amendment Act stand set aside. The respondents are entitled to
       interest @ 6% per annum and also solatium @ 15% on the enhanced
       compensation.

                The appeal is accordingly allowed but, in the circumstances, without
       costs.                                                                           E
       G.N .                                                       Appeal allowed.




....