No Distinction Between ‘Sum’& 'Sum Without Interest', Once Interest Is Added In Award, It Cannot Be Segregated: Jharkhand HC Reiterates
The Jharkhand High Court was considering a Petition against a Civil Judge's order whereby the objection to calculation of the decree holder against the calculation chart, which was based upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court, was rejected.

The Jharkhand High Court has reiterated that there is no distinction between the sum and sum without interest and once the interest is included in the sum for which the Award is made that cannot be segregated.
The Court was considering a Petition against a Civil Judge's order whereby the objection to calculation of the decree holder against the calculation chart, which was based upon the judgment passed by the Supreme Court, was rejected.
The single-bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi observed, " In the case of Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited(supra) the Hon’ble Supreme Court while interpreting the Award has come to the conclusion that there is no distinction between the sum and sum without interest and it has been held that once the interest is included in the sum for which the Award is made that cannot be segregated, meaning thereby that once in the Award interest is added that cannot be segregated."
The Petitioner was represented by Advocae Ayush Aditya while the Respondent was represented by Advocate Ankit Kumar (Assiaant Counsel to Senior Counsel-I).
Facts of the Case
The land of the Petitioner was acquired by the BCCL and an award was prepared in his name. Being agrrieved with the amount and compensation, reference was made under Section-18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in which the Court enhanced the compensation amount to Rs. 625/- per decimals. Petitioner's application was dismissed for non-prosecution and thereafter the Petitioner filed Execution Case before Land Acquisition Judge and prayed for compensation amount at the rate which was calculated in Land Acquisition Case i.e. Rs. 625/- per decimal.
Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the said order attained finality and that the Execution Case was filed claiming amount of Rs.6,03,661.78 including interest i.e. actual amount of Rs.2,75,896.66 and interest @ 15% per annum from 01.05.2013 to 31.08.2020 that comes to Rs.3,27,765.12. He submitted that a calculation chart was made by the respondent-BCCL in which they calculated the interest @15% from 01.05.2013 to 31.01.2023 on a total sum of Rs.2,75,896.66 .
He submitted that in view of that award, all the amount has not been taken into consideration for calculation and in view of that this is illegal and to buttress this argument, he relied in the case of “Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited Vs. Governor, State of Orissa” reported in (2015) 2 SCC 189.
It was his contention that once the interest is added in the compensation that interest is also included in the sum and if such a situation was there the award is also in the light of that the petitioner is entitled for interest on the amount of Rs. 2,75,896.66 which is the awarded amount which is combined component on the issue in question. He also referred to judgment of the Five Judges Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India” .
It was his submission that once the compensation on different component is made the component cannot be splitted.
Reasoning By Court
The Court agreed with the submission of Counsel for the Petitioner and observed, "In the case in hand coming to the facts of the present case, it is an admitted position that Award was enhanced on the reference under section 18 at the rate of Rs. 625/- per decimal and what has been discussed hereinabove particularly in the case of Sunder(supra) and Hyder Consulting (UK) Limited(supra) it cannot be segregated. There is no dispute till the calculation to the tune of Rs. 2,75,896.66. The dispute is with regard to calculation w.e.f. 01.05.2013 to 31.01.2023 which was made Rs. 81146.26. Once the two components 9 %, 15 % with effect from 24.11.1996 to 23.11.1997 and 24.11.1997 to 30.04.2013 is included in the principal as Rs. 81146.26/- that will a sum including the interest and if such a situation is there than on interest from 01.05.2013 to 31.01.2023 is required to be calculated onsum of Rs. 2,75,896.66 that has also been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Sunder(supra) to the effect that splitting up the compensation into different components for the purpose of payment of interest under Section 34 was not in the contemplation of the legislature when that section was framed or enacted."
The Petition was accordingly allowed partly.
Cause Title: Awadh Kishore Sahay vs. The State of Jharkhand
Appearances:
Petitioner- Advocate Ayush Aditya, Advocate Manish Kumar and Advocate Alisha Lakra
Respondent- Advocate Ankit Kumar, Assistant Counsel to Senior Counsel and Advocate Anoop Kumar Mehta
Click here to read/ download Order