Jurisdictional nullity in land acquisition decrees allows execution courts to refuse enforcement of void amended-benefit awards.

A decree passed in a concluded land acquisition matter cannot be reopened under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure to extend amended statutory benefits after compensation has attained finality. Once the reference court or High Court has determined compensation and the decree is final, there is no independent jurisdiction to grant enhanced solatium or interest under the amended Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A decree made without such jurisdiction is void and may be treated as a nullity at any stage, including in execution. The executing court may therefore refuse execution where the decree sought to be enforced is jurisdictionally void.

---

---

Issues: Whether a decree of the High Court, passed in a concluded land acquisition matter by invoking Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to extend the benefits of the amended provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, could be treated as a nullity and ignored in execution.

Analysis: The statutory scheme of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 and the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Act, 1984 was considered in the context of finality of awards and decrees. Once the reference court or the High Court had determined compensation and the decree had attained finality, the court had no independent jurisdiction to reopen the matter under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for granting enhanced solatium or interest under the amended provisions. A decree passed without such jurisdiction is a nullity and may be challenged at any stage, including in execution. The executing court is not precluded from noticing that the decree sought to be executed is void for want of jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The decree dated 28 April 1989 granting amended benefits was without jurisdiction and a nullity, and the executing court was right in refusing execution on that basis.

---