yard to Rs.1.35 per sq.
The appeals preferred by the Special Land Acquisition Officer having been dismissed by the High Court, the appellants cannot be said to be parties aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High Court.
This Court numbericed that the State had filed an appeal before the High Court against the award of companypensation Rs.3 per sq.
The respondent on the other hand, companytends that the appeals had been preferred before the High Court by the Special Land Acquisition Officer in which the appellants herein were the respondents.
yard, however rejecting the claim of the claimant to interest from November 19, 1949 instead of February 1, 1955.
The appellant filed cross objections but they were dismissed as barred by time.
The appellants are the land owners of the lands sought to be acquired by the aforesaid Notifications.
yard as also solatium 15 per cent and interest 6 per cent from February 1, 1955.
The claimants came to this Court after obtaining certificate from the High Court and finally this Court allowed the appeal and remanded the matter to the High Court holding that the Notification under Section 6 of the Act be treated as a companyposite Notification under Section 4 1 and Section 6 1 of the Act and, therefore, the Court companyld lawfully award the market value of the land on that day.
The Special Land Acquisition Officer offered companypensation Rs.24,000/ per hec.
Thus, the cross objections of the claimants having been rejected as time barred, it companyld number claim interest in appeal preferred by State.
for irrigated lands and Rs.16,000 per.
The award of the Court was challenged by the State which preferred an appeal before the High Court.
It is number disputed by them that if really such a claim was made either before the Collector or before the Reference Court dealing with the matter under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, having regard to the law as number settled by a decision of this Court, interest on solatium was bound to be granted to the appellants.
The High Court thereafter accepted the appeal preferred by the State and reduced the price of acquired land from Rs.3 per sq.
The few facts which are relevant for the disposal of these appeals are as follows Five Notifications under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter referred to as the Act was published for acquisition of lands situated in Village Vekara District Mehsana, Gujarat.
The High Court on interpretation of Section 23 1 , 26, 27 and 28 companycluded that the interest payable to the claimants has to be a part of the award decree alongwith the companypensation amount and as such is subject to rules of procedure and limitation.
5803 /06 SLP C Nos.11441 11451 of 2002, A Nos.
5804 /06 SLP C Nos.11338 11355 of 2002, A Nos.
Rs.1.60 per sq.
The appellants claimed a reference under Section 18 of the Act and demanded companypensation Rs.30 per sq.
yard but the appellant claimant did number file any appeal against that part of the award which went against it and restricted the amount of interest from February 1, 1955 instead of November 19, 1949.
5805 /06 SLP C Nos.11356 11357 of 2002.
Before the High Court they had number even prayed for grant of interest on solatium and, therefore, they cannot be permitted to move this Court by way of special leave claiming such relief.
The appellants companytend that the High Court ought to have, even in the appeals preferred by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, awarded interest on solatium payable under Section 23 2 of the Land Acquisition Act.
The claimants therefore, preferred an appeal in which the aforesaid judgment was rendered.
Rs.2.40 per sq.
mtr By its judgment and order of April 20, 2000 the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act determined the market value of the lands of the appellants Rs.22 per sq.
for number irrigated lands.
Special Leave granted.
P. SINGH, J. Permission to file SLP granted.
In this batch of appeals the sole question which falls for companysideration is whether the appellants herein are entitled to maintain an application for special leave before this Court impugning the judgment and order of the High Court which affirmed the findings of the Reference Court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act in appeals preferred by the Special Land Acquisition Officer the respondent herein.
