LexSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR. versus KARTAR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B [2012] 11 S.C.R. 162 STATE OF HARYANA & Af'JR. v. KARTAR SINGH (D) THROUGH LRS. (Civil Appeal No. 5115 of 2005) NOVEMBER 29, 2012 [R .. M. LODHA AND ANIL R. DAVE, JJ.] Land Acquisition Act, 1894: c ss. 23(1-A), 23(2) and 28 as amended by Amendment Act, 1984- Benefits claimed by filing application ulss 151 and 152 CPC after the compensation enhanced by reference court and grant of 15% solatium and 6% interest by its order dated 17.5.1980 had attained finality on dismissal of State's 0 appeal and SLP by High Court and Supreme Court respectively - Held: An award and decree having become final under the LA Act cannot be amended or altered seeking enhancement of the statutory benefits under the amended provisions brought in by the Amendment Act in the LA Act E by filing petitions u/s 151 and s.152 of the CPC. Execution: Power of executing court - Held: A plea of nullity of a decree can always be set up befure the executing court - Any F judgment and order which is a nullity never acquires finality and is thus open to challenge in execution proceedings. The compensation for the land of the respondent- land-owners acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was enhanced by the reference court by its order G dated 17.5.1980. It awarded the solatium at the rate of 15% on the enhanced amount of compensation and interest at the rate of 6% from the date of dispossession till the payment was made. The State Government's H 162 STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. v. KARTAR SINGH (D) 163 THROUGH LRS. appeal before the High Court and Special Leave Petition A before the Supreme Court were dismissed. After the Land Acquisition Amendment Act, 1984 came into force w.e.f. 24.9.1984, the respondent made an application uls 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the High Court in the disposed of first appeal, for the benefits B of the amended provisions in the Land Acquisition Act, particularly, ss. 23(1A) and 23(2). The High Court allowed the application by its order dated 28.4.1989. The respondent then filed another execution petition for execution of the award and decree dated 28.4.1989, c which was resisted by the State Government. The executing court overruled the objection and held that it was not open to the executing court to go behind the decree. The revision petition of the State Government was dismissed by the High Court. D Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1. Legal position is no more res integra that an award and decree having become final under the LA Act cannot be amended or altered seeking enhancement E of the statutory benefits under the amended provisions brought in by the Amendment Act in the LA Act by filing petitions uls 151 and s.152 of the CPC. In view of this, the award and decree passed by the High Court on 28.4.1989 has to be held to be without jurisdiction and nullity. F [Para 21] [172-E-F] Union of India Vs. Swaran Singh and Ors. 1996 (3) Suppl. SCR 205 (1996) 5 sec 501; Sarup Sing/:I and Anr. Vs. Union of India and Anr. 2010 (15) SCR 131= (2011) G 11 SCC 198 and State of Punjab and Anr. Vs. Babu Singh and Ors. 1995 (2) SCR 374 =1995 Supp (2) SCC 406 - relied on. 1.2. A plea of nullity of a decree can always be set up before the executing court. Any judgment and order H 164 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2012) 11 S.C.R. A which is a nullity never acquires finality and is thus open to challenge in the execution proceedings. [Para 21] [172- F-G] Ba/want N. Viswamitra and Ors. Vs. Yadav Sadashiv B Mule (Dead) through LRs and Ors. 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 519 = (2004) 8 sec 706 - inapplicable. 1.3. The order of the High Court dated 1.4.2003 and the order of the Additional District Judge, dated 6.4.1999 are set aside. The execution petition filed by the C respondents seeking execution of the award and decree dated 28.4.1989 stands dismissed. [Para 23] [173-8] Case Law Reference: 2010 (15) SCR 131 relied on Para 15 D 1995 (2) SCR 374 relied on Para 14 1996 (3) Suppl. SCR 205 relied on Para 14 2004 (3) Suppl. SCR 519 inapplicable Para 15 E CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 5115 of 2005. From the Judgment & Order dated 01.04.2003 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Revision F No. 4158 of 1999. WITH C.A.No. 5096 of 2005. C.A. No. 5097-5098 of 2005. G C.A. No. 5116 of 2005. Manjit Singh, AAG, Punit Dutt Tyagi, Anil Antil, Tarjit Singh, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Manoj Sw
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.