1997 INSC 0457
                                            Union of India and Another

                                                           Vs

                                              Karam Singh and Others

                                       Civil Appeals Nos. 2942-49 of 1997

                                       (K. Ramaswamy, D. P. Wadhwa JJ)

                                                      07.04.1997

                                                        ORDER

1. Delay condoned. Substitution ordered.

2. Leave granted.

3. We have heard learned counsel on both sides.

4. Under Section 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, the
property in question was acquired for public purpose. The Land Acquisition Collector determined
the compensation which the respondents had received under protest; and on being dissatisfied the
respondents filed objections and an arbitrator was appointed who, by his award dated 6-7-1982,
enhanced the compensation at different rates. On appeal, the learned Single Judge set aside the
award of the arbitrator and awarded the enhanced compensation uniformly at the rate of Rs. 3000
per kanal. Letters Patent Appeal against the same was dismissed on 10-1-1985. It appears that the
amount awarded was deposited in Court on 14-3-1986.

5. However, on 2-1-1987 the respondents filed an application under Sections 151 and 152 of the
Code of Civil Procedure before the District Judge for direction to grant enhanced solatium and
interest in view of the Amendment Act, i.e., Act 68 of 1984 which was allowed. On revision the
High Court by the impugned order dated 13-5-1987, dismissed the same. Thus, this appeal by
special leave.

6. It is now a well-settled legal position in law that under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of
Immovable Property Act, there is no provision to pay enhanced solatium and interest; and
Amendment Act, i.e. Act 68 of 1984 has no application. It is also a well-settled legal position that
the grant of solatium and interest is an integral part of the process of determination of
compensation. The District Court has no jurisdiction to amend the award and to grant solatium and
interest exercising the power under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is a case
of inherent lack of jurisdiction. The High Court, therefore, has committed manifest error of
jurisdiction in not removing the error committed by the Tribunal.

7. Under the circumstances the appeals are allowed to the extent of grant of enhanced solatium and
interest, but in the circumstances, without costs.