CIVIL PROCEDURE AND LIMITATIONS

Sarup Singh
v
Union Of India

Adam Khan
16124
 Facts

This appeal arises out of the acquisition of land of Sarup Singh, the appellant herein, by issuing a
notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 on 09.10.1974

Possession of the land was taken on 03.12.1974 and the award was passed on 11.06.1975. As
against the award passed by the Special Land Acquisition Collector, Bhatinda Cantonment, a
reference case was filed which was decided by the Reference Court on 31.07.1979.

Finally, the matter came to be decided by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. The High Court by
an order dated 08.12.1982, determined the market value of the land and the appellants herein
were also granted solatium at 15 per cent and also interest at 6 per cent per annum.

The aforesaid judgment and order passed by the High Court became final and binding as no
appeal was brought to this Court thereafter.
Issues and Judgment

Whether the benefit of enhancement in the rate of solatium and interest as

introduced by the Amendment Act of 68 of 1984 could be given to such of the
claimants whose cases for payment of compensation were finalized prior to coming
into force of the aforesaid Amendment Act of 98 of 1984?

NO

Whether the judgment and order given by the High Court enhancing the quantum of
compensation by giving benefit of enhanced solatium and interest in view of
the Amendment Act of 68 of 1984 could be negated by the Court of Additional District
Judge, Bhatinda while acting as an Executing Court and whether the Executing Court of
Additional District Judge, Bhatinda could go behind the judgment and decree passed by
the High Court?

YES
Relevant Sections:

Section 151 of Section 152 of

CPC CPC

Saving of Amendment of
inherent powers judgments,
of the code: decrees or orders
 Scope and Limitation of
Inherent powers of the court.

It merely recognizes the discretionary power of every court for rendering justice in
accordance with law, to do what is `right’ and undo what is `wrong’

The provisions of the Code are not exhaustive

A Court has no power to do things which is prohibited by law or the Code, in the
exercise of its inherent powers

The inherent powers of the court being complementary to the powers specifically
conferred, a court is free to exercise them and the court should exercise it in a way that
it should not be in conflict.

The power under section 151 will have to be used with care, only where it is absolutely
necessary
Conclusion

In view of the two issues that the court have

discussed and elaborated herein, SC are of the
considered opinion that the executing court as also
the High Court were justified in holding that the
orders passed by the High Court granting enhanced
solatium and interest as amended by Act 68 of 1984
is without jurisdiction and a nullity. SC, therefore,
find no merit in these appeals.