Upendralal Waghrav, J.:-
(1) 1 this is an appeal by the company at whose instance land was acquired against the judgment, dated 19 - 1 - 1985 of the principal subordinate judge, kurnool, in o. P. No. 396/81 which was a reference under section 18 of the land acquisition act (herein after referred to as the act). The claimants are impleaded as respondents 1 to 7 and the land acquisition officer, that is, the collector, is the respondent no. 8.
(2) The controversy in the appeal lies in a narrow compass. The notification under section 4 (1) of the act was published on 17 - 1 - 1975. Possession was taken of the land before the award was passed on 27 - 11 - 1976. After the various formalities the award was passed by the collector on 10 - 9 - 1979. At the instance of the claimants a reference was made to the court and it has confirmed the compensation awarded by the collator in respect of the land which was acquired, but enhanced the compensation only in respect of tamarind trees standing in survey number 79 by rs. 12137 - 14. In the said judgment the court has also directed the land acquisition officer to pay interest on the market value of all the properties under acquisition at 12% per annum from 1 7 - 1 - 1975, that is the date of notification to 27 - 11 - 1976 that is, the date of possession and has also given other incidental directions. The appellant is aggrieved only in respect of the direction of the lower court regarding payment of interests at 12% per annum from 17 - 1 - 1975 to 27 - 11 - 1976 on the total compensation.
(3) While the reference was pending before the court the land acquisition act was amended by the central land acquisition (amendment) act, 1984 (act no. 68 of 1984) which came into force on 24 - 9 - 1984. Far - reaching amendments have been made by the amendment act, but we are concerned only with section 23 sub - section (1 - a) which has been newly introduced and the transitional provisions contained in section 30 sub - section (1) of the amendment act. Section 23 provides for the matters to be considered in determining compensation. The newly introduced sub - section (1 - a) reads as follows: " (1 - a") tn addition to the market value of the land, as above provided, the court shall in every case award an amount calculated at the rate of twelve per centum per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the notification under section 4, sub - section (1) , in respect of such land to the date of the award of the collector or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier. Explanation :tn computing the period referred to in this subsection, any period or periods during which proceedings for the acquisition of the land were held up on account of any stay or injunction by the order of any court shall be excluded. "
(4) The question is whether the said newly introducad provision will be applicable to the present proceedings in which admittedly the award was passed long prior to the amendment and the amendment has come into force only while the reference was pending. The amendments made have not been given a general retrospective effect, but section 30 of the amendment act provides for the limited retrospective effect given to certain provisions. We are concerned with sub - section (1) of section 30 of the amendment act which reads as follows:
"30. Transitional provisions : (!) the provisions of sub - section (1 - a) of section 23 of the principal act, as inserted by clause (a) of section 15 of this act, shall apply, and shall be deemed to have applied, also to, and in relation to (a) every proceedings for the acquisition of any land under the principal act pending on the 30th day of april, 1982 (the date of introduction of the land acquisition (amendment) bill, 1982, in the house of the people in which no award has been made by the collector before that date; (b) every proceeding for the acquisition of any land under the principal act commenced after that date, whether or not an award his been made by the collector before the date of commencement of this act"
.
A reading of section 30 sub - section (1) shows that by clause (b) sub - section (1 - a) is made applicable to every proceedings for acquisition of land commenced after 30 - 4 - 1982 (the date of introduction of the bill in the house of people) and clause (a) of the said sub - section makes it also applicable to the land acquisition proceedings in which award was not passed by the collector prior to 30 - 4 - 1982.
(5) The trial court has given the direction"regarding interest which is attacked in this appeal relying upon the same provision viz. , section 23 (1 - a). It is not disputed that the said direction regarding interest cannot be justified on any other provision. The controversy, therefore is whether sub - sec (l - a) of s. 23 would apply to the present case, that is, where the award was passed by the collector before 1 - 4 - 1982. The trial court has merely referred to the provisions of section 30 of the amendment act and relying upon it has nude the said direction.
(6) Sri p. Ramachandra reddy, learned counsel for the appellant, has contended that the said direction cannot be justified on a plain reading of section 30 sub - section (1). Sri syed sadathulla hassni, learned counsel appearing for the claimants has referred to a case of delhi high court reported in raghbir singh vs. Union of india and on its basis supported tne order under appeal. The discussion about the applicability of this provision by the learned judges of the delhi high court is found in paragraphs 10 to 12 of the said report. The learned judges have laid stress on the words 'also to' in sub - section (1) of section 30 and have held that the provisions of section 23 (1 - a) will apply to all cases which are decided by the court after 24 - 9 - 84. With respect we are not able to agree with the views of the learned judges of the delhi high court. After the amendment act of 1984 three district provisions regarding payment of interest have been introduced in the act viz. , (a) by section 23 (1 - a) interest from tns date of notification under section 4 (1) to the date of taking possession or the making of award whichever is earlier. The interest is to be on market value, (b) by section 34 interest is to be paid for the period between taking of possession and date of payment or deposit. This interest is on the compensation, (c) by sec. 28 interest is to be paid on the excess amount, if any, awarded by court over the compensation awarded by collector. This is to be on the excess compensation from the date of possession to date of deposit of the excess. By sec. 30 of the amendment act limited retrospectivity is given to the provisions regarding interest (and enhancement of solatium in section 28 (2)) introduced by the amendment act. sub - section (1) of section 30 deals with the retrospectivity given to section 23 (1 - a) dealing with interest on market value and limits it to the cases where the acquisition has been initiated after 30 - 4 - 1982, whether an award is passed or not by the collector by the date of enforcement of the act and to the cases initiated even earlier to 30 - 4 - 1982 where the award is not passed by the collector till 30 - 1 - 1982. Section 30 (2) deals with the retrospectivity given to the amended section 23 (2) dealing with solatium (which has been enhanced from 15 per cent to 30 per cent) and the amended section 28 dealing with interest. section 30 (3) deals with the retrospectivity given to the amended section 34 which deals with interest on compensation from date of taking possession to date of deposit. The language of the three sub - sections of section 30 is different and each sub - section provides for the retrospectivity of the amended provision dealt by it. There is no scope for extending or curtailing the restrospectivity given by one sub - section with reference to the provisions of the other sub - sections. The retrospectivity given to section 23 (1 - a) is limited by the language of section 30 0) , which shows that retrospectivity is restricted to acquisitions initiated prior to 30 - 4 - 1982 only where award is not passed by the collector. In the instant case, the award of the collector was passed long prior to 30 - 4 - 1982 ana hence section 23 (1 - a) is not applicable to it. The impugned direction in the judgment of che court below regarding interest under section 23 (1 - a) cannot be sustained and is set aside. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. There shall be no orders as to costs.