Case Note & Summary
The present appeal was filed by the appellants, who were the original claimants in a land acquisition matter, against the judgment of the Referral Court (Civil Court) which enhanced the compensation for their land but failed to grant solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The land in question, Gat No.43, area 2.78 HR, was acquired by the State of Maharashtra for a public purpose. A notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 30.11.1991, and the Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under Section 11 on 07.03.1994, granting compensation at Rs.24,000/- per hectare. Dissatisfied with the compensation, the appellants filed a reference under Section 18 of the Act. The Referral Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,78,000/- but only granted interest, omitting the mandatory statutory benefits of solatium and additional compensation. The appellants contended that they were entitled to solatium at 30% of the market value under Section 23(2), additional compensation at 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A) from the date of the Section 4 notification to the date of the award or possession, and interest under Section 28 on the enhanced compensation. The respondent-State opposed the appeal. The High Court, relying on precedents including Gurpreet Singh v. Union of India, Sunder v. Union of India, and Tamil Nadu Housing Board v. Abdul Salam Sarkar, held that the Referral Court's failure to grant these statutory benefits was erroneous. The Court allowed the appeal, directing the respondent to pay solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Act. The judgment was pronounced on 14.10.2022.
Headnote
A) Land Acquisition - Solatium - Section 23(2) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Mandatory Grant - The Referral Court failed to award solatium at 30% of the market value as mandated by Section 23(2) of the Act. The High Court held that solatium is a statutory right and must be granted to the claimants. (Paras 1-4)
B) Land Acquisition - Additional Compensation - Section 23(1-A) Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - 12% Per Annum - The claimants are entitled to additional compensation at 12% per annum on the market value from the date of publication of the Section 4 notification (30.11.1991) to the date of the award (07.03.1994) or date of possession, whichever is earlier. The Referral Court's omission to grant this was erroneous. (Paras 2-4)
C) Land Acquisition - Interest - Section 28 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Enhanced Compensation - The claimants are entitled to interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of possession until payment. The High Court directed the respondent to pay interest as per Section 28 of the Act. (Paras 1, 4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellants are entitled to solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which were not granted by the Referral Court.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The respondent-State is directed to pay solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to the appellants.
Law Points
- Solatium under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act
- 1894 is mandatory and must be granted at 30% of market value
- Additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) at 12% per annum from notification to award or possession
- Interest under Section 28 on enhanced compensation from date of possession
- Referral Court's failure to award these benefits is erroneous and requires correction.
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (10) 94
First Appeal No. 850 of 2009
Shri Pushkar Deshpande (holding for Shri R.L. Khapre, Senior Advocate) for the appellants; Shri M.A. Kadu, Assistant Govt. Pleader for the respondent-State
Deorao Ragho Kilbile (since dead through L.Rs.) and others
State of Maharashtra through Collector, Buldana
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
First Appeal against the judgment of the Referral Court (Civil Court) in a land acquisition reference under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Remedy Sought
The appellants sought grant of solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, which were not awarded by the Referral Court.
Filing Reason
The Referral Court enhanced the compensation for the acquired land but failed to award the mandatory statutory benefits of solatium, additional compensation, and interest as per the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
Previous Decisions
The Special Land Acquisition Officer awarded compensation at Rs.24,000/- per hectare vide award dated 07.03.1994. The Referral Court enhanced the compensation to Rs.2,78,000/- but only granted interest, not solatium or additional compensation.
Issues
Whether the appellants are entitled to solatium under Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Whether the appellants are entitled to additional compensation under Section 23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Whether the appellants are entitled to interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellants argued that the Referral Court failed to grant solatium at 30% of the market value as per Section 23(2), additional compensation at 12% per annum under Section 23(1-A) from the date of Section 4 notification to the date of award or possession, and interest under Section 28 on the enhanced compensation.
The respondent-State opposed the appeal, but the judgment does not detail their specific arguments.
Ratio Decidendi
The Referral Court's failure to grant solatium under Section 23(2), additional compensation under Section 23(1-A), and interest under Section 28 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, is erroneous. These statutory benefits are mandatory and must be awarded to the claimants. The appellants are entitled to solatium at 30% of the market value, additional compensation at 12% per annum from the date of Section 4 notification to the date of award or possession, and interest on the enhanced compensation from the date of possession.
Judgment Excerpts
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.
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.
Procedural History
Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was issued on 30.11.1991. The Special Land Acquisition Officer passed an award under Section 11 on 07.03.1994 granting compensation at Rs.24,000/- per hectare. The appellants filed a Reference under Section 18, and the Civil Court (Referral Court) enhanced compensation to Rs.2,78,000/- but only granted interest. The appellants then filed the present First Appeal before the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Land Acquisition Act, 1894: Section 4, Section 11, Section 18, Section 23(1-A), Section 23(2), Section 28
