Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR
M.S. Jawalkar, J.
Deorao Ragho Kilbile & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent
First Appeal No. 850 of 2009
Decided On : 14-10-2022
Land Acquisition Act - Solatium and Interest - Section 23(2), Section 23(1-A), Section 28 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 23(1-A) and (2) for additional compensation and the provision of interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The court referred to relevant case laws to interpret the provisions and held that the claimants are entitled to additional compensation and interest on the enhanced amount, including solatium.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant filed an appeal as the Referral Court failed to grant solatium as per Section 23(2) and additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The appellant also claimed interest as per Section 28 of the Act. The Notification under Section 4 was issued on 30.11.1991, and the Award under Section 11 was passed on 07.03.1994. The Special Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the rate of Rs.24,000/- per hectare. The appellant filed a Reference under Section 18, and the Civil Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,78,000/-, but failed to consider the provisions of Section 23 (1-A) and (2), and Section 28 of the Act.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the claimants are entitled to additional compensation and interest on the enhanced amount, including solatium, as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Issues: The issues revolved around the entitlement of the appellant to solatium, additional compensation, and interest under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the claimants are entitled to additional compensation and interest on the enhanced amount, including solatium, as per the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, and the respondent was directed to pay 12% per annum on the market value from the date of notification under Section 4 to the date of the award of the Collector. The respondent was also directed to pay 30% on such market value in consideration of the compulsory nature of acquisition. Additionally, the respondent was directed to pay interest on the enhanced amount at the rate of 9% per annum from the date of possession of the land till the date of payment, and if not paid within one year, 15% per annum from the date of expiry of said period of one year. Interest on solatium was to be paid from 19/09/2001.
JUDGMENT
1. Present appeal is filed by the appellants as the Referral Court failed to grant solatium as per Section 23(2), as also additional component in view of Section 23 (1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for the sake of brevity 'the said Act'). It is also the submission of the appellant that he is entitled for interest in view of Section 28 of the said Act. The Notification under Section 4 came to be issued on 30.11.1991 for acquisition of Gat No.43, area 2.78 HR. Award under Section 11 of the said Act came to be passed on 07.03.1994. The Special Land Acquisition Officer granted compensation at the rate of Rs.24,000/- per hectare.
2. As the appellant was not satisfied with the amount of compensation awarded, he filed Reference under Section 18 of the said Act. The Civil Court enhanced the compensation and awarded Rs.2,78,000/-. However, while passing order, it appears that only interest was granted and learned Referral Court failed to consider the provisions Section 23 (1-A) and (2), so also the provisions of Section 28 of the said Act. In view of Section 23 (1-A) of the said Act, the claimants are entitled in addition to the market value of the land, an amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value for the period commencing on and from the date of the publication of the Notification under Section 4(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.
3. Learned Counsel for appellants relied on following citations :
1. Gurpreet Singh Vs. Union of India, reported in (2006) 8 SCC 457.
2. Sunder .vs. Union of India, reported in (2001) 7 SCC 211.
3. Tamil Nadu Housing Board .vs. Abdul Salam Sarkar and others, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 23,
4. Admittedly, in the present matter, the date of Award is earlier to the date of possession. The date of Award is 07.03.1994. In addition to the market value of the land referred above, in view of Clause (2) of Section 23 of the said Act, the Court is bound to pay a sum of 30% on such market value, in consideration of compulsory nature of the acquisition. Section 28 further provides that if the sum which, in the opinion of the Court, the Collector ought to have awarded as compensation is in excess of the sum which the Collector did award as compensation, the award of the Court may direct that the Collector shall pay interest on such excess at the rate of 9% per annum from the date on which he took possession of the land to the date of payment of such excess into Court and if the said amount is paid after the date of expiry of a period of one year, interest at the rate of 15% per annum shall be payable from the date of expiry of the said period of one year.
5. Up to this position of law the respondent has not disputed the claim. At this stage, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State submitted that the solatium will not carry interest as claimed by the appellants from the date of Notification under Section 4 dated 30.11.1991.
6. The learned Counsel for the appellants relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Sunder (supra), wherein it is held that the amount awarded in Section 34, means the aggregate amount of compensation calculated in accordance with the provisions of all the sub-sections of Section 23 and hence includes solatium. Intention of Legislature is to ensure that the amount calculated under Section 23 reaches the person concerned at the time of passing of award or taking over possession of the land.
7. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent-State relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu (supra), wherein it is held that :
''If, therefore, the claim for interest on solatium had been made and the same has been negatived either expressly or by necessary implication by the judgment or decree of the Reference Court or of the appellate court, the execution court will have to necess
The solatium and interest amount were held to be payable under the Act of 1953, and the solatium formed a component of the compensation itself, warranting interest. The interest on solatium was held ....
Interest on solatium in land acquisition cases must be awarded as per Supreme Court rulings, invalidating conflicting government directives.
The right to compensation arises on land vesting with the State, while its quantification may occur later, with interest payable until deposited.
Acquisition of land – Interest on Solatium can be claimed only in pending executions and not in closed executions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
