9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1903X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not been deposited by the appropriate forum then the proceedings initiated under the Old Act is deemed to have been lapsed. Similar is the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of SHARMA AGRO INDUSTRIES VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA [ 2014 (11) TMI 1290 - SUPREME COURT] , wherein also the principles laid down in the case of Pune Municipal Corporation etc., has been considered and principle reiterated. It is, therefore, clear from these judgments and interpretation of Section 24 of the New Act and implication of Section 31 of the Act of 1894 that if after passing of the award and five years prior to coming into force of New Act, amount is not paid in accordance to the requirement of law, the entire proceedings lapsed. If aforesaid principle is applied in the present case, it is found that award in question was passed on 27.11.1992 in W.A.Nos.799/06, 514/06 and 772/06 and in W.A. No.250/08 and W.A. No.323/08 the award for acquired lands was passed on 16/04/2004 and from the averments made by the Indore Development Authority in their reply filed, it is only indicated that the amount of compensation has been deposited with the competent authority and in view of the interim relief grante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .250/08 for taking additional documents on record, are pending for consideration. 2. The decision rendered in W.A. No.514/2006 shall also govern the disposal of W.A. No.799/2006, W.A. No.772/2006, W.A. No.250/2008 and W.A. No.323/2008 respectively. In all these aforesaid writ appeals, the challenge is made to one land acquisition proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act. 3. The present appellants have challenged the Notification under Section 4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. In one of the writ appeal, the challenge was also to a Scheme framed under the Madhya Pradesh Gram Tatha Nagar Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973(hereinafter 'the Old Act, 1973') for which the land in question is acquired under the Notification dated 6/10/1989 issued under Section 4 read with Section 17(1) of the Old Act, issued and published which includes the lands in question published in Official Gazette dated 3/11/1989 and Notification under Section 6 of the Old Act issued and published in Official Gazette dated 9/11/1990, 4. As per the award, the appellants in W.A. No.772/2006 are the owners/occupiers and Bhumiswami's of the land situated at Survey Nos.431/1, 431/1/2, 431/1/3, 431/1/4, 431/1/5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing out that after coming into force of New Act w.e.f. 1.01.2014 and in view of Section 24 of the said Act and, particularly, the provisions of Section 24 (2), now after the award was passed in the Year 1992 and 2004, till date, neither any compensation has been paid to the landowners or beneficiaries nor has been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries. The acquisition proceedings have lapsed and land should be restored back to the appellants. Accordingly, it is contended that in accordance with the New Act, the appeal should be allowed and the land be restored back to the appellants. It is submitted that the proceedings for acquisition were started in the Year 1989 and declaration under Section 6 of the Old Act was published in the Year 1990 and have culminated in an award under Section 11 of the Old Act passed on 27/11/1992 by the Collector, District-Indore and by reasoning of the provisions of Section 24 (2) of the New Act., the acquisition proceedings in question under challenge in these appeals lapsed immediately on commencement of the New Act on 1.01.2014 as (1) the award under Section 11 of the Old Act has been passed more than five years ago (2) neither the physical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... governed by the provisions of Section 24(1) (b) of the New Act and as per the aforesaid provisions, they are entitled for compensation on enhanced rate under the New Act and prayed for dismissal of the application. 14. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and we have considered the rival contention advanced by them. 15. Section 24 of the New Act reads as under:- 24. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, in any case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, - a) Where no award under section 11 of the said Land Acquisition Act has been made, then, all provisions of this Act relating to the determination of compensation shall apply; or b) Where an award under said section 11 has been made, then such proceedings shall continue under the provisions of the said Land Acquisition Act, as if the said Act has not been repealed. (2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), in case of land acquisition proceedings initiated under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, where an award under the said section 11 has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of this Act but the physical possession of the land ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he acquisition initiated under the 1894 Act an award has been made and compensation in respect of a majority of land holdings has not been deposited in the account of the beneficiaries then all the beneficiaries specified in Section 4 notification become entitled to compensation under 2013 Act. 14. Section 31(1) of the 1894 Act enjoins upon the Collector, on making an award under Section 11, to tender payment of compensation to persons interested entitled thereto according to award. It further mandates the Collector to make payment of compensation to them unless prevented by one of the contingencies contemplated in sub-section (2). The contingencies contemplated in Section 31(2) are: (i) the persons interested entitled to compensation do not consent to receive it (ii) there is no person competent to alienate the land and (iii) there is dispute as to the title to receive compensation or as to the apportionment of it. If due to any of the contingencies contemplated in Section 31(2), the Collector is prevented from making payment of compensation to the persons interested who are entitled to compensation, then the Collector is required to deposit the compensation in the court to which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Government Treasury is equivalent to the amount of compensation paid to the landowners/ persons interested ? We do not think so. In a comparatively recent decision, the Principal Seat of M.P. High Court in the case of Ivo Agnelo Santimano Fernandes v. State of Goa, (2011) 11 SCC 506, relying upon the earlier decision in Prem Nath Kapur v. National Fertilizers Corpn. Of India Ltd., (1996) 2 SCC 71, has held that the deposit of the amount of the compensation in the state s revenue account is of no avail and the liability of the state to pay interest subsists till the amount has not been deposited in court. 18. As per Section 24(2), in case, where the land proceedings are initiated under the Old Act, by legal fiction and where award has been made five years or more prior to the commencement of the New Act and possession of the land is not taken or compensation has not been paid, the said proceedings shall be deemed to have been lapsed. 19. Further, Section 31 (1) of the Old Act pertains to payment of compensation awarded or deposit of same in Court. This provision contemplates that on making an award under Section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of compensation as awarded ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the New Act, has no merit at all because the case of Pune Municipal Corporation(supra) has been subsequently considered in the case of Shivraj and others (supra) and after taking note of the said judgment certain other judgments in the case of Bharat Kumar(supra) Bimladevi Ors.(supra) have taken note of and in Para 26 and 27 of case of Purushottam Lal vs. the State of M.P. decided on 15/10/2015, the matter has been crystallized in the following manner:- 26. The objects and Reasons of the 2013 Act and particularly Clause 18 thereof fortify the view taken by this Court in the judgments referred to hereinabove. Clause 18 thereof reads as under:- 18. The benefits under the new law would be available in all the cases of the land acquisition under the Land Acquisition Act 1894 where award has not been made or possession of land has not been taken. 27. However, the aforesaid appeals have to be decided in the light of the above settled legal prepositions. The admitted facts of the case remain that the respondent tenure holders had filed objections under Section 5-A of the 1894 Act as admitted in the affidavit filed by Smt. Usha Chaturvedi, Deputy Secretary (Land Acquisition), land and Buil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d to the beneficiaries or deposit in the Court where reference under Section 18 is normally filed. That being so, we are satisfied that documents overwhelming available on record to demonstrate that inspite of award having been more than five years prior to coming into force of the New Act, the award of compensation has not been paid to the beneficiaries as required under law nor possession of the land in question has been taken over from the owners and, therefore, in the light of legal principles laid down by the Apex Court as referred to herein above, entire proceedings lapsed. 25. In view of the foregoing discussion, it is not necessary to consider the correctness of the impugned judgment on merits. 26. Accordingly, I.A. Nos.3418/2015 dated 6/07/2015 in W.A. No.514/06, I.A. No.6308/2013 dated 12/11/2013 in W.A. No.799/2006 and I.A. No.6272/2013 dated 1/11/2013 in W.A. No.250/2008(applications u/O VII Rule 7 of CPC); I.A. No.64/2015 dated 6/01/2015 in W.A. No.799/2005(application for taking document on record) and I.A. No.3772/2015 filed in July, 2015 (application u/w 151 of CPC) in W.A. No.250/2008, I.A. No.22772014, application for disposal of the appeal filed in W.A. No.772/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
