that it was only in the said balance statement which bears the date 25.5.2012, that the State indicated in what manner the sum of ₹9,21,973/- deposited by it on 4.9.2004 should be applied. The Apex Court has in paragraph 51 of Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India ( supra ) held that when the judgment debtor makes a deposit along with a calculation statement appropriating distinct sums towards various heads of compensation as awarded by the reference court or the appellate court and the amount is received by the decree holder, it must be taken that the decree holder is not entitled to seek an appropriation as if the judgment debtor has not made an intimation. Though the learned counsel for the second respondent, requisitioning authority, made available to me a statement of accounts prepared by the Special Tahsildar, Land Acquisition, Cherthala on 4.9.2004 that statement only indicates how the sum of 9,21,973/- was arrived at. The statement would₹ only show that the enhanced compensation awarded is 18,43,946/-₹ and that 50% of it is 9,21,973/-. To arrive at that figure the₹ Special Tahsildar had also calculated interest on the enhanced land value at 9% for a period of one year from 16.9.2000 and at 15% for the period from 16.9.2001 to 4.9.2004. He had also calculated the compensation payable under section 23 (1-A) of the Act for the period from 24.1.1997 to 15.9.2000 and for the period from
