[Cites 10, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Vidarbha Irrigation Development ... vs Datta Pralhad Kavar And Others on 11 May, 2026
2026:BHC-NAG:7312
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.5301 OF 2021
PETITIONER :- Vidarbha Irrigation Development
(Ori. defendant)
Corporation, Through its Executive
Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division,
Washim, Tahsil & District Washim.
..VERSUS..
RESPONDENTS :- 1) Datta Pralhad Kavar
(Ori. Plaintiff)
Aged 45 years, Occ: Agriculturist
2) Rukhminibai D/o. Pralhad Kavar, Aged: 27
years, Occ: Agriculturist,
3) Smt. Drupadabai W/o. Pralhad Kavar
R-3 deleted as per
Registrar
Court order
(Judicial)
dated Aged 45 years, Occ: Agriculturist
22/04/2022.
All R/o Waghi, BK, Tq. Malegaon. Dist.
Washim.
4) The State of Maharashtra, Through
Collector, Washim, At present represented
by, Special Land Acquisition Officer
Washim, Tahsil & District Washim.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. M.A. Kadu, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms H. Dhande, A.G.P. for Respondent/State.
Mr. A.S. Mehadia, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.
DATE : 08/05/2026
JUDGMENT :
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
1. The issue which arises for consideration in the present
writ petition is as to whether the interest payable under Section
23(1-A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to
as "LA Act") will be payable on the amount of solatium payable
under Section 23(2) of the LA Act.
2. The contention of the respondent/land owner is that the
interest payable under Section 23(1-A) should also be paid on the
amount of solatium. The petitioner/acquiring body disputes the
contention. The contention of the petitioner is that 12% component
will be payable only on market value as determined under Section
23 and that amount of solatium payable under Section 23 (2)
cannot be added to such market value for the purpose of
computation of interest payable under Section 23(1).
3. The learned Advocate for the petitioner/acquiring body
places reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in
the case of State of Punjab Vs. Amarjit Singh1, and particularly
draws attention to paragraphs 10, 11 and 17 which are reproduced
herein below for ready reference :-
"10. Section 23(1) refers to market value of the land on
the date of publication of the notification under Section
4(1) of the Act as a relevant factor for determining the
amount of compensation to be awarded for land acquired
1 2011 (4) SCC 734
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
under the Act. Sub-section (2) provides that in addition to
the market value of the land determined under Section
23(1), the Court shall, in every case, award a sum of 30%
on such market value in consideration of the compulsory
nature of acquisition.
11. Sub-section (1A) of Section 23, inserted by Act 68 of
1984 provides that in addition to the market value of the
land, as provided under Section 23(1), the Court shall, in
every case, award an amount calculated at the rate of 12%
per annum on such market value for the period
commencing on or from the date of publication of the
notification under Section 4(1) in respect of such land to
the date of award of the collector or the date of taking
possession of the land, whichever is earlier. The additional
amount under Section 23(1A) and solatium under
Section 23(2) are both payable only on the market value
determined under Section 23(1) of the Act and not on
any other amount. Solatium under Section 23(2) is not
payable on the additional amount nor additional amount
under Section 23(1A) payable on solatium. Solatium and
additional amount are also not payable on the
damages/expenses that may be awarded under second to
sixth factors under Section 23(1) of the Act.
17. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed, the orders
of the High Court and the Executing Court, in so far as
they hold that additional amount under Section 23(1A) is
payable on solatium, are set aside. It is declared that
additional amount under Section 23(1A) is awardable
only on the market value determined under the first factor
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
of Section 23(1) of the Act and cannot be calculated on
the solatium payable under Section 23(2) of the Act."
4. Learned advocate for the respondent/land owner places
reliance on paragraph 32 of judgment of the Allahabad High Court
in the case of State of UP Vs. Ghanshyam Singh2, which is
reproduced herein below for ready reference:-
"32. Since the amount of solatium is a part or component of
compensation calculated in view of provisions of section
23(2) of the Act, so legally interest is payable over entire
amount of compensation so calculated including the amount
of solatium, in view of provisions of sections 28 and 34 of the
Act, and the Additional District Judge has acted wrongly and
illegally with material irregularity in refusing interest over the
amount of solatium by observing specifically mentioning in
the judgment that "no interest will be payable on amount of
solatium." The above finding of Additional District Judge are
perverse and against statutory provisions of law, and are liable
to be set aside."
5. Section 23 of the LA Act deals with the matters to be
considered in determining compensation. Section 23(1) provides
that, while determining compensation to be awarded for acquired
land, the Court shall first take into consideration market value of
the land as on the date of publication of notification under Section
4(1). Second 23(1-A) provides that, in addition to market value of
2 2014 SCC OnLine ALL 15621
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
the land as determined by the Court, 12% interest per annum shall
be paid on such market value commencing from the date of
notification under Section 4(1) till the date on which award under
Section 11 of the LA Act is passed by the Land Acquisition Officer.
Section 23(2) provides for payment of 30% solatium upon market
value of the land.
6. It will also be appropriate to refer to Section 28 of the LA
Act, which provides that in cases where, upon a reference made by
the land owner, the amount of compensation is enhanced by the
Reference Court, interest at the rate of 9% per annum will be
payable on the enhanced amount of compensation as determined by
the Court for the initial period of one year from the date of taking
possession and at the rate of 15% thereafter.
7. Section 28 of the LA Act uses the word "compensation".
As against this, Section 23(1-A) and Section 23(2) of the LA Act
use the words "market value". Compensation as determined under
the Act includes the market value and other factors enumerated
under Section 23 of the LA Act. The component of 12% interest
payable under Section 23(1-A) is payable only on the market value
and not on the compensation.
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
8. The judgment of the Allahabad High Court, pertains to
payment of interest under Section 28 and Section 34. As stated
above, interest payable under Section 28 and 34 is payable on the
amount of compensation which obviously will include the solatium.
However, interest component under Section 23(1) is payable only
on the market value and not on the compensation. Therefore, while
computing interest payable under Section 23(1) of the LA Act, the
amount of solatium cannot be included. The interest is payable only
on market value as determined under Section 23(1).
9. The learned Industrial Court has erred in considering
taking into consideration the amount of solatium while determining
interest component under Section 23(1-A) of the LA Act.
10. In view of the aforesaid, Writ Petition is allowed in the
following terms:-
(i) Order dated 01.12.2021 passed by the learned 3rd Joint
Civil Judge Senior Division, Washim, on Exhibit 1 in
Special Darkhast No.09 of 2018 is quashed and set aside.
(ii) The learned Executing Court is directed to calculate the
amount of compensation afresh excluding the amount of
solatium for determining component of interest payable
32.wp.5301.2021.odt
under Section 23(1-A) of the LA Act.
(ROHIT W. JOSHI, J.)
C.L. Dhakate
