LexUNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
434
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
UNION OF INDIA & ANR.
v.
PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.
(Civil Appeal Nos.1622-1631 of 2018)
FEBRUARY 06, 2018
[R. K. AGRAWAL AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.]
Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – ss. 18, 28 and 34 – Collector
declining to award interest on compensation u/s. 28A proceedings
to the landowners – Legal remedy available to the landowners
against such order – Landowner should approach the Civil Court
in reference u/s.28A(3) r/w. s.18 of the Act or should file writ petition
u/s.226 of the Constitution – Held: A dispute relating to non-award
of interest payable to the landowners u/s.28 and s.34 of the Act is
not specified u/s. 18 and hence it is not capable of being referred
by the Collector to the Civil Court u/s. 18 of the Act – It is also for
the reason that payment of interest is statutory in character and
being statutory, it is mandatory for payment once conditions
specified u/s.28 or/and 34 are fulfilled – In Shree Vijay Cotton &
Oils Mills case it was held that there is inherent evidence in the
wording of ss. 28 and 34 to show that the framers of the Act intended
to assure the payment of interest to the person whose land was
acquired and it was not the intention to subject the said payment to
procedural hazards – Accordingly, the dispute in relation to non-
award of interest can be raised by an aggrieved person only by
taking recourse to Art. 226 of the Constitution in writ petition –
Reference u/s.18 or s.28A(3) cannot be considered to be an
alternative statutory remedy available to the landowner for getting
the question of non-award of interest payable u/s.28 or/and 34 of
the Act decided by the Civil Court – Constitution of India – Art.
226.
Dismissing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1. The dispute relating to non-award of the interest
to the landowners, whether under Section 28 or Section 34 is not
a dispute, which falls under Section 18 or/and 28A(3) of the Act.
In other words, a reference under Section 18 can only be made
[2018] 10 S.C.R. 434
434
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
435
by the Collector in respect of those issues, which are specified
under Section 18. [Para 36] [447-G-H]
2. A dispute relating to non-award of interest payable to
the landowners under Section 28 or/and Section 34 of the Act is
not specified under Section 18 and hence it is not capable of being
referred by the Collector to the Civil Court under Section 18 of
the Act. It is also for the reason that payment of interest is
statutory in character and being statutory, it is mandatory for
payment once conditions specified under Sections 28 or/and 34
are fulfilled. [Para 37] [448-A-B]
3. It is true that once the interest is awarded by the Court
under section 28 or by the Collector under Section 34 of the Act,
it becomes the part of the award. However, it is hardly of any
significance and has no bearing for deciding the question of
remedy to challenge issue relating to the non-award of interest.
[Para 38] [448-C]
4. Such issue is required to be decided keeping in view the
wording of Section 18 of the Act, which specifies the issues on
which the reference can be made to the Court and non-award of
interest is not the issue specified in Section 18 of the Act. In this
view of the matter, no reference can be made to the Court to
decide the issue of non-award of interest under Section 18 of the
Act. [Para 39] [448-D]
5. This Court explained the object and scope of Sections
28 and 34 succinctly in the case of *Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills
Ltd. in the following words: “There is inherent evidence in the
wording of ss.28 and 34 to show that the framers of the Act intended
to assure the payment of interest to the person whose land was
acquired and it was not the intention to subject the said payment to
procedural hazards...” [Para 41] [448-F-G]
6. Accordingly, the dispute in relation to non-award of
interest can be raised by an aggrieved person only by taking
recourse to Article 226 of the Constitution in writ petition. In
other words, reference under Section 18 or Section 28A(3) cannot
be considered to be an alternative statutory remedy available to
the landowner for getting the question of non-award of interest
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. v. PUSHPAVATHI & ORS. ETC.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
436
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2018] 10 S.C.R.
payable under Sections 28 or/and 34 of the Act decided by the
Civil Court. [Para 42] [449-D]
*Shree Vijay Cotton & Oil Mills Ltd. v. State of GujaraExcerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.