TMI Blog2005 (8) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dings under the Land Acquisition Act and payment of compensation have come up in these batch of appeals. Facts being common and similar it would be sufficient to refer to the facts of CA No. 443 of 2001 for the purposes of deciding the controversy involved in these appeals. Some areas of Himachal Pradesh before re-organisation of the State of Punjab on 1.11.1966 formed part of the erstwhile State of Punjab. Public Works Department, Government of Punjab in the year 1966 took up the construction of Solan-Jawanji-Dharja Road. After the re-organisation of the States on 1.11.1966 the PWD Department of H.P. took over the construction. The road was finally commissioned in the year 1968. Possession of the land owned by the appellants comprising of Khasra No. 102/1 situated in Village Bagur, Tehsil and District Solan, along with the lands of large number of villages that came under the said road construction plan was taken over in the year 1968. Though the possession of the land was taken over from the Land-owners in December, 1968 no steps were taken to formally acquire the land by issuing notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [hereinafter referred to as the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l be made within a period of four weeks from today. 3. On the amount of compensation payable to the petitioners, interest at the rate of 12 per cent per annum shall be paid from the date of the taking over of possession till the date of payment of interim compensation and of final compensation, if there is enhancement. The interest payable accordingly is in the nature of an equitable compensation and such interest will be in addition to the compensation, solatium and interest at the statutory rate which will be paid to the petitioners under the law, whether awarded by the Collector of enhanced by the Court, and such interest will not be taken into consideration in any proceeding under the Act, while awarding the statutory compensation. 4. The tabular statement appended to the affidavits of the Superintending Engineer and the Land Acquisition Collector gives the requisite information relating to the land situate in other eleven villages which has been taken possession of for the purposes of the construction of the road in question. The land-owners, whose land in those villages has been taken possession of, will also be entitled to similar treatment. Under the circumstances, in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e; (b) Additional compulsory acquisition charges at the rate of 12% per annum on the market value assessed above with effect from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act of 1894, that is, 7.5.1989, till the date of the award, that is, 31.1.1991,. (c) Interest at the rate of 12% per annum on the compensation assessed above with effect from 18.12.1968 till the date of payment of compensation in terms of the orders of the Hon'ble High Court in CWP No. 147/ 1988; (d) Interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of possession, that is, 18.12.68 till the date of expiry of one year thereafter, that is, 17.12.1969; (e) Interest at the rate of 15% per annum of the enhanced amount with effect from 18.12.1969 till the date of payment of the amount in Court. The Respondents being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said award preferred a First Appeal under Section 54 of the Act before the High Court which was marked as Regular First Appeal No. 104 of 1993. By reason of the impugned judgment, a Division Bench of the High Court while upholding the amount of compensation payable to the Appellant herein for acquisition of the la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ity, we are of the opinion that the Respondents herein could not have raised any contention contrary thereto or inconsistent therewith in any subsequent proceedings. In fact the Land Acquisition Officer while passing the award on 31.1.1991 took into consideration the said direction and awarded 12% additional compensation at the market value. The said order of the Land Acquisition Officer never came to be questioned and, thus, attained finality. Section 18 of the Act provides that any person who has not accepted the award may file an application for referring the dispute for determination of the court inter alia as regard the amount of compensation. The State could have filed such an application under Section 18. It did not choose to do so. Only the Appellant herein took recourse to the said provision culminating in passing of the impugned judgment of the High Court. Thus, the award of the Land Acquisition Officer directing payment of additional interest has also attained finality. In the Reference Court or for that matter the High Court exercising its appellate jurisdiction under Section 54 of the Act could not have dealt with the said question. The principle of res jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rved: The object and purport of principle of res judicata as contained in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure is to uphold the rule of conclusiveness of judgment, as to the points decided earlier of fact, or of law, or of fact and law, in every subsequent suit between the same parties. Once the matter which was the subject-matter of lis stood determined by a competent court, no party thereafter can be permitted to reopen it in a subsequent litigation. Such a rule was brought into the statute book with a view to bring the litigation to an end so that the other side may not be put to harassment. The principle of res judicata envisages that a judgment of a court of concurrent jurisdiction directly upon a point would create a bar as regards a plea, between the same parties in some other matter in another court, where the said plea seeks to raise afresh the very point that was determined in the earlier judgment. It was further noticed: In Ishwardas v. the State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors., AIR (1979) SC 551, this Court held: ...In order to sustain the plea of res judicata it is not necessary that all the parties to the two litigations must be common. All that is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es judicata is also applicable to subsequent suits where the same issues between the same parties had been decided in an earlier proceeding under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is trite that the principle of res judicata is also applicable to the writ proceedings. [See Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation v. Balwant Singh, [1993] Supp 1 SCC 552]. In Bhanu Kumar Jain v. Archana Kumar and Anr., [2005] 1 SCC 787, it was held: It is now well-settled that principles of res judicata applies in different stages of the same proceedings. [See Satyadhyan Ghosal and Ors. v. Smt. Deorajin Debi and Anr., AIR (1960) SC 941 and Prahlad Singh v. Col. Sukhdev Singh, [1987] 1 SCC 727]. In Y.B. Patil (supra) it was held: 4... It is well settled that principles of res judicata can be invoked not only in separate subsequent proceedings, they also get attracted in subsequent stage of the same proceedings. Once an order made in the course of a proceeding becomes final, it would be binding at the subsequent state of that proceeding... It was further observed: In a case of this nature, however, the doctrine of `issue estoppel' as also `cause of action estoppel' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be disregarded or ignored and it must be obeyed by the Life Insurance Corporation. We are, therefore, of the view that, in any event, irrespective of whether the impugned Act is constitutionally valid or not, the Life Insurance Corporation is bound to obey the writ of mandamus issued by the Calcutta High Court and to pay annual cash bonus for the year April 1, 1975 to March 31, 1976 to Class III and Class IV employees. In any event, the directions issued by the court stood complied with. Having regard to Section 18 of the Act or otherwise the wheel cannot be turned back. We must also note that the question raised by the learned Judges of the High Court was not raised by the Respondents although having regard to the decision of this Court in Dharam Das (supra) it was available. The High Court, in our opinion, although has a wide power in terms of Section 107 of the Code of Civil Procedure but it could not have gone outside the pleadings and make out a new case. In Siddu Venkappa Devadiga v. Smt. Rangu S. Devadiga and Ors., [1977] 3 SCC 532, it was held: 8...As has been stated, the defendant traversed that claim in his written statement and pleaded that the business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
