CR-2255- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT State of Haryana and anr. Sudesh Rani and CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present : HARKESH MANUJA, made to an order dated Judge, Karnal, whereby the private respondents were held a sum of Rs.48,32,561/ amount against acquisition of land owned by their predecessor Mela Ram. 2. respondents, namely, Mela Ram owned Village Guda, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal, which came to be acquired vide notifications dated 23.05.2002 and 14.02.2003 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the 1894 -2020 (O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CR-2255 Reserved on: 28.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: State of Haryana and anr. VERSUS Sudesh Rani and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present : Mr. Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana for the petitioners. Mr. N.C. Manchanda, Advocate for private respondents. Mr. Kunal Soni, Advocate for Ms.Baani Chhibber Mahajan, Advocate for proforma respondents No.11 & 12. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) By way of present revision petition, challenge has been made to an order dated 14.11.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal, whereby the private respondents were held a sum of Rs.48,32,561/- along with interest towards compensation amount against acquisition of land owned by their predecessor Mela Briefly stated, the predecessor respondents, namely, Mela Ram owned Village Guda, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal, which came to be acquired vide notifications dated 23.05.2002 and 14.02.2003 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the 1894 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2255-2020 (O&M) Reserved on: 28.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 09.07.2025 ...Petitioners ...Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Amit Aggarwal, DAG, Haryana for the petitioners. Mr. N.C. Manchanda, Advocate Mr. Kunal Soni, Advocate for Ms.Baani Chhibber Mahajan, Advocate roforma respondents No.11 & 12. By way of present revision petition, challenge has been 14.11.2018 passed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal, whereby the private respondents were held entitled to along with interest towards compensation amount against acquisition of land owned by their predecessor Mela Briefly stated, the predecessor-in-interest of the private respondents, namely, Mela Ram owned 48 kanals 6 marlas of land in Village Guda, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal, which came to be acquired vide notifications dated 23.05.2002 and 14.02.2003 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the 1894 .2025 ...Respondents By way of present revision petition, challenge has been 14.11.2018 passed by the Additional District entitled to along with interest towards compensation amount against acquisition of land owned by their predecessor Mela interest of the private s 6 marlas of land in Village Guda, Tehsil Indri, District Karnal, which came to be acquired vide notifications dated 23.05.2002 and 14.02.2003 issued under Sections 4 & 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, for short ‘the 1894 SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- Act’, respectively. The acqu and Vegetable Market, Indri, Karnal. On 24.12.2003, announcement of Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, respondent No.6 filed surety to one M/s S sum of Rs.34,00,000/ outstanding sum of Rs. amount of compensation released in favour acquired land was announced a sum of Rs.,29,36,787/ payable to the landowner between the landowner and the office of respondent No.6, the Land Acquisition Collector vide its order dated 26.02.2004 directed not to release the amount of compensation got decided from the compensation amount was deposited before the concerned treasury at Karnal. 3. 12.10.,2004 amount while exercising powe Revenue Act, 1885. -2020 (O&M) [2] respectively. The acquisition was for extension of New Grain and Vegetable Market, Indri, Karnal. On 24.12.2003, announcement of Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, respondent No.6 filed objections to the effect that Mela Ram stood surety to one M/s Sher Singh and Company, Ram Nagar, Karnal for a sum of Rs.34,00,000/- and against the said company, there was an outstanding sum of Rs.40,47,000/-; thus it was prayed that the amount of compensation against acquisition of land of Mela Ram be released in favour of Excise and Taxation Department, Haryana. Later, an Award regarding compensation towards acquired land was announced on 30.12.2003. As per the said Award, a sum of Rs.,29,36,787/- aong with other statutory benefits became payable to the landowner-Mela Ram. Considering the dispute between the landowner and the office of respondent No.6, the Land Acquisition Collector vide its order dated 26.02.2004 directed not to the amount of compensation got decided from the competent Court compensation amount was deposited before the concerned treasury at Karnal. In a related development, respondent No.6 12.10.,2004 passed an order of attachment of the compensation amount while exercising powers under Section 70 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1885. In addition, respondent No.6 also filed a petition under isition was for extension of New Grain and Vegetable Market, Indri, Karnal. On 24.12.2003, i.e. before the announcement of Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, s to the effect that Mela Ram stood ingh and Company, Ram Nagar, Karnal for a against the said company, there was an ; thus it was prayed that the against acquisition of land of Mela Ram be of Excise and Taxation Department, Haryana. an Award regarding compensation towards on 30.12.2003. As per the said Award, aong with other statutory benefits became Ram. Considering the dispute between the landowner and the office of respondent No.6, the Land Acquisition Collector vide its order dated 26.02.2004 directed not to the amount of compensation till the issue of entitlement was competent Court and in the meanwhile, compensation amount was deposited before the concerned treasury In a related development, respondent No.6 passed an order of attachment of the compensation rs under Section 70 of the Punjab Land In addition, respondent No.6 also filed a petition under isition was for extension of New Grain i.e. before the announcement of Award by the Land Acquisition Collector, s to the effect that Mela Ram stood ingh and Company, Ram Nagar, Karnal for a against the said company, there was an ; thus it was prayed that the against acquisition of land of Mela Ram be an Award regarding compensation towards on 30.12.2003. As per the said Award, aong with other statutory benefits became Ram. Considering the dispute between the landowner and the office of respondent No.6, the Land Acquisition Collector vide its order dated 26.02.2004 directed not to was and in the meanwhile, compensation amount was deposited before the concerned treasury In a related development, respondent No.6 on passed an order of attachment of the compensation rs under Section 70 of the Punjab Land In addition, respondent No.6 also filed a petition under SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, before the Civil Court at Karnal for execution of guarantee/ surety furnished by Mela Ram. The said petition came to be dismissed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, vide decision dated 14.10.2004. The said decision the time of issuance of notice of motion on 16.12 Acquisition Collector was directed not to release the amount of compensation to the private respondents. was disposed of with the following observations: -2020 (O&M) [3] Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, before the Civil Court at Karnal for execution of guarantee/ surety furnished by Mela . The said petition came to be dismissed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, vide decision dated 14.10.2004. The said decision was challenged vide CR No. 6133 the time of issuance of notice of motion on 16.12 Acquisition Collector was directed not to release the amount of compensation to the private respondents. Later, vide decision dated 25.07.2013, CR No.6133 was disposed of with the following observations: “The case was heard at learned senior counsel for respondents after seeking instructions from respondents, respondent no.5 is stated to be present in person in the Court, has stated that the petitioners may recover the due amount upto maximum l being surety bond amount from the compensation amount of the acquired land left by Mela Ram, since deceased, and the balance amount may be released to the respondents. Accordingly the instant revision petition is allowed. The petitioners shall be entitled to recover their due amount up to maximum limit of `34,00,000/ being surety bond amount from the compensation amount payable for the acquired land in question. The balance compensation amount of the acquired land shall be released to earliest in accordance with law. After recovery of due amount by the petitioners, the balance amount, if any, out of the amount of `34,00,000/ Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, before the Civil Court at Karnal for execution of guarantee/ surety furnished by Mela . The said petition came to be dismissed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, vide decision dated 14.10.2004. challenged vide CR No. 6133-2004, wherein at the time of issuance of notice of motion on 16.12.2004, the Land Acquisition Collector was directed not to release the amount of compensation to the private respondents. Later, vide decision dated 25.07.2013, CR No.6133-2004 was disposed of with the following observations:- The case was heard at length. At this stage, learned senior counsel for respondents after seeking instructions from respondents, out of whom respondent no.5 is stated to be present in person in the Court, has stated that the petitioners may recover the due amount upto maximum limit of `34,00,000/ being surety bond amount from the compensation amount of the acquired land left by Mela Ram, since deceased, and the balance amount may be released Accordingly the instant revision petition is ers shall be entitled to recover their due amount up to maximum limit of `34,00,000/ being surety bond amount from the compensation amount payable for the acquired land in question. The balance compensation amount of the acquired land shall be released to rightful persons at the earliest in accordance with law. After recovery of due amount by the petitioners, the balance amount, if any, out of the amount of `34,00,000/- shall also be Section 145 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, before the Civil Court at Karnal for execution of guarantee/ surety furnished by Mela . The said petition came to be dismissed by the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal, vide decision dated 14.10.2004. 2004, wherein at 4, the Land Acquisition Collector was directed not to release the amount of 2004 length. At this stage, learned senior counsel for respondents after seeking out of whom respondent no.5 is stated to be present in person in the Court, has stated that the petitioners may recover imit of `34,00,000/- being surety bond amount from the compensation amount of the acquired land left by Mela Ram, since deceased, and the balance amount may be released Accordingly the instant revision petition is ers shall be entitled to recover their due amount up to maximum limit of `34,00,000/- being surety bond amount from the compensation amount payable for the acquired land in question. The balance compensation amount of the acquired rightful persons at the earliest in accordance with law. After recovery of due amount by the petitioners, the balance amount, if any, shall also be SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- one of the legal heirs same came to be withdrawn on 11.10.2013. For convenience, the said order 4. 6133-2004, the compensation amounting to Rs.29,36,787/ released in favour of being the legal heirs of deceased Mela Ram filed execution application before the Reference Court for release of balance amount of compensation in terms of decision dated 25.07.2013 read with order dated 11.10.2013 passed by this Court in CR No.6133 -2020 (O&M) [4] released to the rightful persons in accordance with law. With disposal o order dated 16.12.2004 passed by this Court in the revision petition stands modified accordingly. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of as infructuous.” Subsequently, a review application was fil one of the legal heirs of the landowner same came to be withdrawn on 11.10.2013. For convenience, the said order is reproduced hereunder:- “C.M. No.20645-CII-2013 Learned counsel for the applicant, after arguing for sometime, seeks permission to withdraw the instant application, without prejudice to any other right or remedy of the applicant, in accordance with law. Dismissed as withdrawn, as prayed for. Oct. 11, 2013 In terms of the decision rendered by this court in CR No. 2004, the compensation amounting to Rs.29,36,787/ released in favour of respondent No.6. Later, the private respondents being the legal heirs of deceased Mela Ram filed execution ication before the Reference Court for release of balance amount of compensation in terms of decision dated 25.07.2013 read with order dated 11.10.2013 passed by this Court in CR No.6133 released to the rightful persons in accordance with With disposal of the revision petition, interim order dated 16.12.2004 passed by this Court in the revision petition stands modified accordingly. Pending miscellaneous application, if any, stands disposed of as infructuous.” a review application was filed on behalf of of the landowner- Mela Ram, however, the same came to be withdrawn on 11.10.2013. For convenience, the 2013 Learned counsel for the applicant, after for sometime, seeks permission to withdraw the instant application, without prejudice to any other right or remedy of the applicant, in accordance with Dismissed as withdrawn, as prayed for. Sd/-(L.N. Mittal) JUDGE” In terms of the decision rendered by this court in CR No. 2004, the compensation amounting to Rs.29,36,787/- was respondent No.6. Later, the private respondents being the legal heirs of deceased Mela Ram filed execution ication before the Reference Court for release of balance amount of compensation in terms of decision dated 25.07.2013 read with order dated 11.10.2013 passed by this Court in CR No.6133-2004. released to the rightful persons in accordance with f the revision petition, interim order dated 16.12.2004 passed by this Court in the Pending miscellaneous application, if any, ed on behalf of Mela Ram, however, the same came to be withdrawn on 11.10.2013. For convenience, the Learned counsel for the applicant, after for sometime, seeks permission to withdraw the instant application, without prejudice to any other right or remedy of the applicant, in accordance with In terms of the decision rendered by this court in CR No. was respondent No.6. Later, the private respondents being the legal heirs of deceased Mela Ram filed execution ication before the Reference Court for release of balance amount of compensation in terms of decision dated 25.07.2013 read with 2004. SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- The said execution application was dismissed by the Court of Additional District Judge, Karnal vide order dated 06.03.2014. 5. which was allowed by this Court vide decision dated 01.11.2017 thereby directing the District Judge, Karnal to re The relevant extract Court is reproduced hereunder: -2020 (O&M) [5] The said execution application was dismissed by the Court of dditional District Judge, Karnal vide order dated 06.03.2014. Aggrieved thereof, CR No. 4548 of 2014 came to b which was allowed by this Court vide decision dated 01.11.2017 directing the District Judge, Karnal to re The relevant extract from the order dated 01.11.2017 passed by this Court is reproduced hereunder:- “Since the original amount was deposited by the State Government in the Treasury even before passing the award in question, the amount was not released the petitioners on account of stay order granted at the instance of one of the functionaries of the State Government in CR No.6133 of 2004, the delay, if any, in disbursement of the amount to the rightful claimants was on account of inevitable happening for which no fault can be attributed to the petitioners. The petitioners were entitled to interest on the compensation granted to them. In normal circumstances, the compensation is allowed to be deposited in the Court, but somehow the amount was deposited by the respondent 5.11.2003. Secondly, the disbursement of the amount was stayed by the High Court only at the instance of Excise Department after deduction of liability of Mala Ram to the tune of Rs.34 lacs. The amount should have been calculated up to the date of payment of aforesaid amount of Rs.34 lacs in favour of Excise Department. In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this revision petit directing the District Judge to revisit the controversy and The said execution application was dismissed by the Court of dditional District Judge, Karnal vide order dated 06.03.2014. Aggrieved thereof, CR No. 4548 of 2014 came to be filed which was allowed by this Court vide decision dated 01.11.2017 directing the District Judge, Karnal to re-visit the controvers the order dated 01.11.2017 passed by this Since the original amount was deposited by the State Government in the Treasury even before passing the award in question, the amount was not released in time to the petitioners on account of stay order granted at the instance of one of the functionaries of the State Government in CR No.6133 of 2004, the delay, if any, in disbursement of the amount to the rightful claimants was on happening for which no fault can be attributed to the petitioners. The petitioners were entitled to interest on the compensation granted to them. In normal circumstances, the compensation is allowed to be deposited in the Court, but somehow the amount was deposited by the respondent-State in the Treasury on Secondly, the disbursement of the amount was stayed by the High Court only at the instance of Excise Department after deduction of liability of Mala Ram to the tune of Rs.34 lacs. The amount payable to the petitioners should have been calculated up to the date of payment of aforesaid amount of Rs.34 lacs in favour of Excise In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, I deem it appropriate to allow this revision petition by directing the District Judge to revisit the controversy and The said execution application was dismissed by the Court of filed which was allowed by this Court vide decision dated 01.11.2017 visit the controversy. the order dated 01.11.2017 passed by this Since the original amount was deposited by the State Government in the Treasury even before passing the in time to the petitioners on account of stay order granted at the instance of one of the functionaries of the State Government in CR No.6133 of 2004, the delay, if any, in disbursement of the amount to the rightful claimants was on happening for which no fault can be attributed to the petitioners. The petitioners were entitled to interest on the compensation granted to them. In normal circumstances, the compensation is allowed to be deposited in the Court, but somehow the amount was State in the Treasury on Secondly, the disbursement of the amount was stayed by the High Court only at the instance of Excise Department after deduction of liability of Mala Ram to the payable to the petitioners should have been calculated up to the date of payment of aforesaid amount of Rs.34 lacs in favour of Excise In view of peculiar facts and circumstances of the ion by directing the District Judge to revisit the controversy and SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- Additional District entitled for a sum of Rs.54,07,296.46 p Rs.5,74,735/ the remaining sum of Rs.48,32,561/ respondents along with interest @ 6% per annum from 05. its realization. 6. learned State counsel su compensation and the same stood deposited with the Treasury by the Land Acquisition Collector, no further amount remained to be paid to the private respondents. He furt the aforementioned amount of compensation was stayed Court vide order dated 16.12.2004 passed in CR No.6133 the said interim direction remained operation till 25.07.2013, as such the private responden amount of compensation. He also submitted that once the landowner -2020 (O&M) [6] allow necessary calculations to be made on the basis of rate of interest payable at the relevant time till deduction of amount to the tune of Rs. 34 lacs from total compensation and thereafter towards future interest till final realization of the arrears of interest payable to the petitioners. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.” In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Court of Additional District Judge, Karnal found the private respondents to be entitled for a sum of Rs.54,07,296.46 p Rs.5,74,735/- being payable to respondent No.6 the remaining sum of Rs.48,32,561/- respondents along with interest @ 6% per annum from 05. its realization. Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 14.11.2018, learned State counsel submitted that once the total amount of compensation assessed in favour of Mela Ram was Rs.29,36,787/ and the same stood deposited with the Treasury by the Land Acquisition Collector, no further amount remained to be paid to the private respondents. He further submitted that the disbursement of the aforementioned amount of compensation was stayed Court vide order dated 16.12.2004 passed in CR No.6133 the said interim direction remained operation till 25.07.2013, as such the private respondents were not entitled for any interest on the amount of compensation. He also submitted that once the landowner allow necessary calculations to be made on the basis of rate of interest payable at the relevant time till deduction of amount to the tune of Rs. 34 lacs from total compensation fter towards future interest till final realization of the arrears of interest payable to the petitioners. Accordingly, this revision petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms.” In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Court of Judge, Karnal found the private respondents to be entitled for a sum of Rs.54,07,296.46 paise. After deducting being payable to respondent No.6, it was directed that be released in favour of private respondents along with interest @ 6% per annum from 05.02.2014 till Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 14.11.2018, that once the total amount of assessed in favour of Mela Ram was Rs.29,36,787/ and the same stood deposited with the Treasury by the Land Acquisition Collector, no further amount remained to be paid to the her submitted that the disbursement of the aforementioned amount of compensation was stayed by this Court vide order dated 16.12.2004 passed in CR No.6133-2004 and the said interim direction remained operation till 25.07.2013, as such ts were not entitled for any interest on the said amount of compensation. He also submitted that once the landowner allow necessary calculations to be made on the basis of rate of interest payable at the relevant time till deduction of amount to the tune of Rs. 34 lacs from total compensation fter towards future interest till final realization of In compliance of the aforesaid order, the Court of Judge, Karnal found the private respondents to be fter deducting was directed that be released in favour of private 2.2014 till Aggrieved against the impugned order dated 14.11.2018, that once the total amount of assessed in favour of Mela Ram was Rs.29,36,787/- and the same stood deposited with the Treasury by the Land Acquisition Collector, no further amount remained to be paid to the her submitted that the disbursement of by this 2004 and the said interim direction remained operation till 25.07.2013, as such said amount of compensation. He also submitted that once the landowner SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- or his legal heirs failed to invoke their rights under Section 33 of the 1894 Act, having failed to file an appropriate application before Reference Court for investing the amount of compensation remained payable to the private respondents. 7. of private respondents while supporting the order passed by the Additional Distr 14.11.2018 was passed in terms of the directions issued by this Court vide its decision entitlement of the private respondents towards grant of interest on the amount of compensation stood determined and crystallized further submitted that between the parties, no interference was called for with the impugned order in the present revision petition. 8. through the paper book. I am unable to find any substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners. 9. petition, it may be relevant to examine and the same are reproduced hereunder: -2020 (O&M) [7] or his legal heirs failed to invoke their rights under Section 33 of the 1894 Act, having failed to file an appropriate application before Reference Court for investing the amount of compensation remained payable to the private respondents. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of private respondents while supporting the order passed by the Additional District Judge, Karnal, submitted that the order dated 14.11.2018 was passed in terms of the directions issued by this Court its decision dated 01.11.2017 in CR entitlement of the private respondents towards grant of interest on the nt of compensation stood determined and crystallized further submitted that order dated 01.11.2017 having become final between the parties, no interference was called for with the impugned order in the present revision petition. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find any substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners. Before considering the merits of the present revision petition, it may be relevant to examine and the same are reproduced hereunder: “31. Payment of compensation or deposit of same in Court:-- (1) On making an award under section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and or his legal heirs failed to invoke their rights under Section 33 of the 1894 Act, having failed to file an appropriate application before the Reference Court for investing the amount of compensation, nothing remained payable to the private respondents. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of private respondents while supporting the order passed by the ict Judge, Karnal, submitted that the order dated 14.11.2018 was passed in terms of the directions issued by this Court dated 01.11.2017 in CR-4548-2013, wherein entitlement of the private respondents towards grant of interest on the nt of compensation stood determined and crystallized. He order dated 01.11.2017 having become final between the parties, no interference was called for with the impugned ed counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find any substance in the submissions made on behalf of the petitioners. Before considering the merits of the present revision petition, it may be relevant to examine certain provisions of 1894 Act and the same are reproduced hereunder:- ayment of compensation or deposit of same in (1) On making an award under section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and or his legal heirs failed to invoke their rights under Section 33 of the the , nothing On the other hand, learned counsel appearing on behalf of private respondents while supporting the order passed by the ict Judge, Karnal, submitted that the order dated 14.11.2018 was passed in terms of the directions issued by this Court 2013, wherein entitlement of the private respondents towards grant of interest on the . He order dated 01.11.2017 having become final between the parties, no interference was called for with the impugned ed counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. I am unable to find any substance in the Before considering the merits of the present revision rovisions of 1894 Act ayment of compensation or deposit of same in (1) On making an award under section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award and SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255-2020 (O&M) [8] shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingenc section. (2) If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be no person competent to alienate the land, or if there be any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector shall deposit the amount of the compensation in the Court to which a reference under section 18 would be submitted: Provided that any person admitted to be interested may receive such payment under protest as to the sufficiency of the amount: Provided also that no person who has received the amount otherwise than under protest shall be entitled to make any application under section 18:Provided also that nothing herein contained shall affect the liability of any person, who may receive the whole or any part of any compensation awarded under this Act, to pay the same to the person lawfully entitled thereto. (3) Notwithstanding anything in this section, the Collector may, with the sanction of the [appropriate Government] instead of awarding a money compensation in respect of any land, make any arrangement with a person having a limited interest in such land, either by the grant of other lands in exchange, the remission of land revenue on other lands held under the same title, or in such other way as may be equitable having regard to the interests of the parties concerned. (4) Nothing in the last foregoing sub be construed to interfere with or limit the power of the Collector to enter into any arrangement with any shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be no person competent to alienate the land, or if there be any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the tor shall deposit the amount of the compensation in the Court to which a reference under section 18 would be submitted: Provided that any person admitted to be interested may receive such payment under protest as to the sufficiency of the amount: also that no person who has received the amount otherwise than under protest shall be entitled to make any application under section 18:Provided also that nothing herein contained shall affect the liability of any person, who may receive the art of any compensation awarded under this Act, to pay the same to the person lawfully Notwithstanding anything in this section, the Collector may, with the sanction of the [appropriate Government] instead of awarding a money tion in respect of any land, make any arrangement with a person having a limited interest in such land, either by the grant of other lands in exchange, the remission of land revenue on other lands held under the same title, or in such other way quitable having regard to the interests of the parties concerned. Nothing in the last foregoing sub-section shall be construed to interfere with or limit the power of the Collector to enter into any arrangement with any shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or ies mentioned in the next sub- If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be no person competent to alienate the land, or if there be any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the tor shall deposit the amount of the compensation in the Court to which a reference under Provided that any person admitted to be interested may receive such payment under protest also that no person who has received the amount otherwise than under protest shall be entitled to make any application under section 18:Provided also that nothing herein contained shall affect the liability of any person, who may receive the art of any compensation awarded under this Act, to pay the same to the person lawfully Notwithstanding anything in this section, the Collector may, with the sanction of the [appropriate Government] instead of awarding a money tion in respect of any land, make any arrangement with a person having a limited interest in such land, either by the grant of other lands in exchange, the remission of land revenue on other lands held under the same title, or in such other way quitable having regard to the interests of section shall be construed to interfere with or limit the power of the Collector to enter into any arrangement with any SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255-2020 (O&M) [9] person interested in the land an contract in respect thereof.” 32. Investment of money deposited in respect of lands belonging to persons incompetent to alienate (1) If any money shall be deposited in Court under sub-section (2) of the last preceding section and it appears that the land in respect whereof the same was awarded belonged to any person who had no power to alienate the same, the Court shall (a) order the money to be invested in the purchase of other lands to be held under the like title and conditions of ownership as the land in respect of which such money shall have been deposited was held, or (b) if such purchase cannot be effected forthwith, then in such Government or other approved securities as the Court shall think fit, and shall direct the payment o proceeds arising from such investment to the person or persons who would for the time being have been entitled to the possession of the said land, and such moneys shall remain so deposited and invested until the same be applied--- (i) in the purchase of such other lands as aforesaid; or (ii) in payment to any person or persons becoming absolutely entitled thereto. (2) In all cases of moneys deposited to which this section applies, the Court shall order the costs of the following matters, incl charges and expenses incidental thereto, to be paid by the Collector, namely: (a) the costs of such investments as person interested in the land and competent to contract in respect thereof.” Investment of money deposited in respect of lands belonging to persons incompetent to If any money shall be deposited in Court under section (2) of the last preceding section and it that the land in respect whereof the same was awarded belonged to any person who had no power to alienate the same, the Court shall order the money to be invested in the purchase of other lands to be held under the like title and ownership as the land in respect of which such money shall have been deposited was held, or if such purchase cannot be effected forthwith, then in such Government or other approved securities as the Court shall think fit, and shall direct the payment of the interest or other proceeds arising from such investment to the person or persons who would for the time being have been entitled to the possession of the said land, and such moneys shall remain so deposited and invested until --- n the purchase of such other lands as in payment to any person or persons becoming absolutely entitled thereto. In all cases of moneys deposited to which this section applies, the Court shall order the costs of the following matters, including therein all reasonable charges and expenses incidental thereto, to be paid by the Collector, namely:-- the costs of such investments as d competent to Investment of money deposited in respect of lands belonging to persons incompetent to If any money shall be deposited in Court under section (2) of the last preceding section and it that the land in respect whereof the same was awarded belonged to any person who had no order the money to be invested in the purchase of other lands to be held under the like title and ownership as the land in respect of which such money shall have been if such purchase cannot be effected forthwith, then in such Government or other approved f the interest or other proceeds arising from such investment to the person or persons who would for the time being have been entitled to the possession of the said land, and such moneys shall remain so deposited and invested until n the purchase of such other lands as in payment to any person or persons becoming In all cases of moneys deposited to which this section applies, the Court shall order the costs of the uding therein all reasonable charges and expenses incidental thereto, to be paid the costs of such investments as SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- case of a dispute as to the or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector is required to deposit the amount of compensation in the Court to which reference under Section 18 lies. -2020 (O&M) [10] aforesaid; (b) the costs of the orders for the payment of the interest or other proceeds of the securities upo for the time being invested, and for the payment out of Court of the principal of such moneys, and of all proceedings relating thereto, except such as may be occasioned by litigation between adverse claimants. 33. Investment of mone cases--When any money shall have been deposited in Court under this Act for any cause other than mentioned in the last preceding section, the Court may, on the application of any party interested or claiming an interest in such money, order the same to be invested in such Government or other approved securities as it may think proper, and may direct the interest or other proceeds of any such investment to be accumulated and paid in such manner as it may consider will give the parties interested therein the same benefit therefrom as they might have had from the land in respect whereof such money shall have been deposited or as near thereto as may be.” A perusal of the aforementioned provisions shows that in case of a dispute as to the entitlement to deceased the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector is required to deposit the amount of compensation in the Court to which reference under Section 18 lies. the costs of the orders for the payment of the interest or other proceeds of the securities upon which such moneys are for the time being invested, and for the payment out of Court of the principal of such moneys, and of all proceedings relating thereto, except such as may be occasioned by litigation between adverse claimants. Investment of money deposited in other When any money shall have been deposited in Court under this Act for any cause other than mentioned in the last preceding section, the Court may, on the application of any party interested or claiming an interest in order the same to be invested in such Government or other approved securities as it may think proper, and may direct the interest or other proceeds of any such investment to be accumulated and paid in such manner as it may consider will give the parties terested therein the same benefit therefrom as they might have had from the land in respect whereof such money shall have been deposited or as near thereto as may be.” A perusal of the aforementioned provisions shows that in entitlement to deceased the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector is required to deposit the amount of compensation in the Court to which reference under the costs of the orders for the payment of the interest or other proceeds of the n which such moneys are for the time being invested, and for the payment out of Court of the principal of such moneys, and of all proceedings relating thereto, except such as may be occasioned by litigation between adverse y deposited in other When any money shall have been deposited in Court under this Act for any cause other than mentioned in the last preceding section, the Court may, on the application of any party interested or claiming an interest in order the same to be invested in such Government or other approved securities as it may think proper, and may direct the interest or other proceeds of any such investment to be accumulated and paid in such manner as it may consider will give the parties terested therein the same benefit therefrom as they might have had from the land in respect whereof such money shall have been A perusal of the aforementioned provisions shows that in entitlement to deceased the compensation or as to the apportionment of it, the Collector is required to deposit the amount of compensation in the Court to which reference under SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- 10. hereinabove the compensation or as to its apportionment, the Collector needs to deposit the compensation in the Court to which reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act is required to be filed and there Court need securities as shall think fit. 1894 Act show that the same deposit of amount by the Coll dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or regarding apportionment thereof; whereas Section 33 happens to be general in nature relating to investment of any money which was required to be deposited in the Sections 3 situations 11. and circumstances, it is apparent that in the case in hand, the L Acquisition Collector not being in a position to find out as to the amount of compensation was to be paid to the landowner Mela Ram or to the office of respondent No.6 was required to deposit it with the Reference Court rather than deposit so that the Reference Court could have invested the same the Government or approved security so as to safeguard the interest -2020 (O&M) [11] A cumulative analysis of the provisions extracted bove show that in case of any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to its apportionment, the Collector needs to deposit the compensation in the Court to which reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act is required to be filed and there ourt needs to invest the same in Government or other approve securities as shall think fit. Further, a conjoint reading of Sections 31 and 32 of the 1894 Act show that the same have been deposit of amount by the Collector to the Reference Court in case of dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or regarding apportionment thereof; whereas Section 33 happens to be general in nature relating to investment of any money which was required to be deposited in the Court under the provisions of 1894 Act. Sections 32 and 33 of the 1894 Act govern two separate situations. Applying the aforesaid principle of law to the given facts and circumstances, it is apparent that in the case in hand, the L Acquisition Collector not being in a position to find out as to the amount of compensation was to be paid to the landowner Mela Ram or to the office of respondent No.6 was required to deposit with the Reference Court rather than deposit so that the Reference Court could have invested the same the Government or approved security so as to safeguard the interest A cumulative analysis of the provisions extracted show that in case of any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to its apportionment, the Collector needs to deposit the compensation in the Court to which reference under Section 18 of the 1894 Act is required to be filed and thereupon the to invest the same in Government or other approve conjoint reading of Sections 31 and 32 of the have been exclusively dedicated to the ector to the Reference Court in case of dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or regarding apportionment thereof; whereas Section 33 happens to be general in nature relating to investment of any money which was required to be Court under the provisions of 1894 Act. Thus, of the 1894 Act govern two separate and distinct Applying the aforesaid principle of law to the given facts and circumstances, it is apparent that in the case in hand, the Land Acquisition Collector not being in a position to find out as to whether the amount of compensation was to be paid to the landowner Mela Ram or to the office of respondent No.6 was required to deposit with the Reference Court rather than depositing it with the Treasury, so that the Reference Court could have invested the same either with the Government or approved security so as to safeguard the interest A cumulative analysis of the provisions extracted show that in case of any dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or as to its apportionment, the Collector needs to deposit the compensation in the Court to which reference under upon the to invest the same in Government or other approve conjoint reading of Sections 31 and 32 of the the ector to the Reference Court in case of dispute as to the title to receive the compensation or regarding apportionment thereof; whereas Section 33 happens to be general in nature relating to investment of any money which was required to be Thus, and distinct Applying the aforesaid principle of law to the given facts and whether the amount of compensation was to be paid to the landowner i.e. Mela Ram or to the office of respondent No.6 was required to deposit ing it with the Treasury, with the Government or approved security so as to safeguard the interest SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- of the person entitled for the same. the 1894 Act private respondents/ successors of the landowner not entitled for any interest under Section 11 of the 1894 Act 1894 Act, the compensation amount not being deposited by the Collector entailed liability to pay interest thereupon @ 9% per annum for the first year from the time of taking possession of the acquired land and for the period beyond th annum. Accordingly there was no merit in the contention raised by the petitioners that in the invoked Section 33 of the 1894 Act, they were not entitled for any benefit of interest etc. were never applicable to the facts in hand by provisions of Sections 31 and 32 of the 1894 Act, as discussed hereinabove. deposited with the Reference Court, the private respondents could not have invoked either Section 3 therefore, the petitioners cannot be permitted to draw benefit of their own wrong and that too, to the disadvantage of th 12. provision under 1894 Act regarding the automatic adjustment of -2020 (O&M) [12] of the person entitled for the same. Having failed to comply with the mandate of Section 31 o the 1894 Act, it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioners that the private respondents/ successors of the landowner not entitled for any interest on the amount of compensation awarded under Section 11 of the 1894 Act. In fact in terms 1894 Act, the compensation amount not being deposited by the Collector entailed liability to pay interest thereupon @ 9% per annum for the first year from the time of taking possession of the acquired land and for the period beyond th Accordingly there was no merit in the contention raised by the petitioners that in the absence of the private respondents having invoked Section 33 of the 1894 Act, they were not entitled for any benefit of interest etc., as the provisions of Section 33 of the 1894 Act were never applicable to the facts in hand by provisions of Sections 31 and 32 of the 1894 Act, as discussed hereinabove. Moreover, once the amount of compensation was never deposited with the Reference Court, the private respondents could not have invoked either Section 32 or Section 33 of the 1894 Act and therefore, the petitioners cannot be permitted to draw benefit of their own wrong and that too, to the disadvantage of th Furthermore, the petitioners have failed to refer to any provision under 1894 Act regarding the automatic adjustment of Having failed to comply with the mandate of Section 31 o , it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioners that the private respondents/ successors of the landowner –Mela Ram were on the amount of compensation awarded . In fact in terms of Section 34 of the 1894 Act, the compensation amount not being deposited by the Collector entailed liability to pay interest thereupon @ 9% per annum for the first year from the time of taking possession of the acquired land and for the period beyond thereafter, interest @ 15% per Accordingly there was no merit in the contention raised by absence of the private respondents having invoked Section 33 of the 1894 Act, they were not entitled for any , as the provisions of Section 33 of the 1894 Act were never applicable to the facts in hand; the same being governed by provisions of Sections 31 and 32 of the 1894 Act, as discussed Moreover, once the amount of compensation was never deposited with the Reference Court, the private respondents could 2 or Section 33 of the 1894 Act and therefore, the petitioners cannot be permitted to draw benefit of their own wrong and that too, to the disadvantage of the landowners. Furthermore, the petitioners have failed to refer to any provision under 1894 Act regarding the automatic adjustment of Having failed to comply with the mandate of Section 31 of , it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioners that the Mela Ram were on the amount of compensation awarded of Section 34 of the 1894 Act, the compensation amount not being deposited by the Collector entailed liability to pay interest thereupon @ 9% per annum for the first year from the time of taking possession of the acquired ereafter, interest @ 15% per Accordingly there was no merit in the contention raised by absence of the private respondents having invoked Section 33 of the 1894 Act, they were not entitled for any , as the provisions of Section 33 of the 1894 Act the same being governed by provisions of Sections 31 and 32 of the 1894 Act, as discussed Moreover, once the amount of compensation was never deposited with the Reference Court, the private respondents could 2 or Section 33 of the 1894 Act and therefore, the petitioners cannot be permitted to draw benefit of their Furthermore, the petitioners have failed to refer to any provision under 1894 Act regarding the automatic adjustment of SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- compensation amount against any kind of statutory liability payable by the landowner and, therefore, mere fact that t some amount payable by the landowner against some kind of surety bonds/ guarantee never ever precluded the Land Acquisition Collector compliance of 1894 Act which enjoined the authority i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector Reference Court in case 13. distinction between the two separate and specific rights between the landowner towards compensation against the acquired land in comparison to the remedy available to respondent No.6 qua enforcement of surety bond furnished by the landow vide its order dated 01.11.2017 found the landowner/ his successors to be entitled for interest on the compensation granted to them and the said decision having become final between the parties to the present lis of present revision petition. 14. raised on behalf of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once disbursement of compensation was stayed vide order dated 16.12.2004 in CR No. 6133 favour of the private respondents. -2020 (O&M) [13] compensation amount against any kind of statutory liability payable by the landowner and, therefore, mere fact that t amount payable by the landowner against some kind of surety bonds/ guarantee furnished with the statutory authority never ever precluded the Land Acquisition Collector compliance of its statutory obligation deri 1894 Act which enjoined the authority i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector to deposit the amount of compensation before the Reference Court in case of there being dispute qua its entitlement. Moreover, appreciating the mater distinction between the two separate and specific rights between the landowner towards compensation against the acquired land in comparison to the remedy available to respondent No.6 qua enforcement of surety bond furnished by the landow vide its order dated 01.11.2017 found the landowner/ his successors to be entitled for interest on the compensation granted to them and the said decision having become final between the parties to the lis, cannot be re-agitated and of present revision petition. Even further, no merits can be found in the contention raised on behalf of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once disbursement of compensation was stayed vide order dated .12.2004 in CR No. 6133-2004, interest could not be awarded in favour of the private respondents. compensation amount against any kind of statutory liability payable by the landowner and, therefore, mere fact that there happened to be amount payable by the landowner against some kind of surety furnished with the statutory authority, could have never ever precluded the Land Acquisition Collector towards obligation derived from Section 31 of the 1894 Act which enjoined the authority i.e. the Land Acquisition to deposit the amount of compensation before the there being dispute qua its entitlement. Moreover, appreciating the material difference and distinction between the two separate and specific rights between the landowner towards compensation against the acquired land in comparison to the remedy available to respondent No.6 qua enforcement of surety bond furnished by the landowner, this Court vide its order dated 01.11.2017 found the landowner/ his successors to be entitled for interest on the compensation granted to them and the said decision having become final between the parties to the agitated and reopened at this stage by way Even further, no merits can be found in the contention raised on behalf of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once disbursement of compensation was stayed vide order dated 2004, interest could not be awarded in compensation amount against any kind of statutory liability payable here happened to be amount payable by the landowner against some kind of surety , could have towards Section 31 of the 1894 Act which enjoined the authority i.e. the Land Acquisition to deposit the amount of compensation before the there being dispute qua its entitlement. ial difference and distinction between the two separate and specific rights between the landowner towards compensation against the acquired land in comparison to the remedy available to respondent No.6 qua ner, this Court vide its order dated 01.11.2017 found the landowner/ his successors to be entitled for interest on the compensation granted to them and the said decision having become final between the parties to the reopened at this stage by way Even further, no merits can be found in the contention raised on behalf of learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that once disbursement of compensation was stayed vide order dated 2004, interest could not be awarded in SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CR-2255- 16.12.2004 was merely qua disbursement of compensation and the same was never regarding compliance envisaged under Section 31 of the 1894 Act about its deposit with the Reference Court. 15. hereinabove whereby the interest has bee merely as per Fixed Deposit Rate for the relevant period from 05.11.2003 to 05.02.2014 and interest @ 6% per annum from 05.02.2014 till realization, the same being equitable in the facts and circumstances of the presen such the present revision petition being devoid of merits, is therefore, dismissed. 16. disposed of. 09.07.2025 sanjay -2020 (O&M) [14] In the humble opinion of this Court, the stay granted on 16.12.2004 was merely qua disbursement of compensation and the same was never regarding compliance envisaged under Section 31 of the 1894 Act about its deposit with the Reference Court. Thus, in view of the detailed discussion made hereinabove and also the reasons mentioned in the impugned order whereby the interest has been awarded in favour of the landowners merely as per Fixed Deposit Rate for the relevant period from 05.11.2003 to 05.02.2014 and interest @ 6% per annum from 05.02.2014 till realization, the same being equitable in the facts and circumstances of the present case, calls for no interference and as such the present revision petition being devoid of merits, is therefore, dismissed. Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. .2025 (HARKESH MANUJA) Whether speaking/reasoned ? Whether Reportable ? In the humble opinion of this Court, the stay granted on 16.12.2004 was merely qua disbursement of compensation and the same was never regarding compliance of statutory obligation envisaged under Section 31 of the 1894 Act about its deposit with the Thus, in view of the detailed discussion made and also the reasons mentioned in the impugned order n awarded in favour of the landowners merely as per Fixed Deposit Rate for the relevant period from 05.11.2003 to 05.02.2014 and interest @ 6% per annum from 05.02.2014 till realization, the same being equitable in the facts and t case, calls for no interference and as such the present revision petition being devoid of merits, is therefore, Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned ? Yes/No Yes/No In the humble opinion of this Court, the stay granted on 16.12.2004 was merely qua disbursement of compensation and the of statutory obligation envisaged under Section 31 of the 1894 Act about its deposit with the Thus, in view of the detailed discussion made and also the reasons mentioned in the impugned order n awarded in favour of the landowners merely as per Fixed Deposit Rate for the relevant period from 05.11.2003 to 05.02.2014 and interest @ 6% per annum from 05.02.2014 till realization, the same being equitable in the facts and t case, calls for no interference and as such the present revision petition being devoid of merits, is therefore, Pending misc. application(s), if any, shall also stand SANJAY GUPTA 2025.07.14 13:48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document