Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

NAGNATH BASAPPA KARPE THROUGH LRS KAMALBAI NAGNATH KARPEversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

Petitioners are entitled to solatium and interest, with interest payable from the date the writ petitions were filed.

Summary

The petitioners, whose lands were acquired under the National Highways Act, received compensation but alleged that the statutory solatium and interest components were not paid. They sought the payment of solatium and interest, contending that interest should accrue from the date of claim. The High Court examined the Supreme Court’s decision in National Highways Authority of India v. Tarsem Singh (Review Petition No.2528/2025), which limited interest entitlement to the date the claim was filed, except for claims pending before 28‑03‑2008. Applying that precedent, the Court held that the petitioners are entitled to solatium and interest, with interest payable from the date the writ petitions were filed. The Court directed that any disputed calculations be referred to an arbitrator under the National Highways Act. The petitions were therefore partly allowed.

Issues considered

  • What is the entitlement of landowners to solatium and interest on compensation under the National Highways Act?
  • From which date should interest on solatium accrue for landowners whose claims were filed after 28‑03‑2008?

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • land acquisition
  • compensation
  • solatium
  • interest
  • National Highways Act
  • writ petition
  • Supreme Court precedent

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:26298-DB


                                                                           14966.19wp
                                                (1)

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                            955 WRIT PETITION NO. 14966 OF 2019

                   NAGNATH BASAPPA KARPE THROUGH LRS KAMALBAI
                                 NAGNATH KARPE
                                     VERSUS
                          THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                                               …..
                Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
                Mr Rohit Sarvadnya, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4
                Mr A. S. Shinde, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
                Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for
                Respondent No.5

                                          AND
                            957 WRIT PETITION NO. 5978 OF 2021

                        RAJESHWAR ALIAS RAJSHAKHAR CHANDRAKANT
                                       CHINCHOLE
                                         VERSUS
                              THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                                               …..
                Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
                Mr Rajendra Sanap, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4
                Mr S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
                Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5


                                           AND
                            959 WRIT PETITION NO. 10330 OF 2021

                              ANIL CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE
                                         VERSUS
                              THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                                               …..
                Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
                Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
                Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5
                                                         14966.19wp
                                (2)

                           AND
            960 WRIT PETITION NO. 10336 OF 2021

          PARVATIBAI CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE
                        VERSUS
             THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                               …..
Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
Ms Mayuri G. Kasturkar (Kulkarni), Advocate for Respondent Nos.1
&4
Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
Mr S. P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.5


                           AND
            961 WRIT PETITION NO. 10350 OF 2021

               VITTHAL PANDURANG SURVASE
                         VERSUS
              THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                               …..
Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
Mr N. T. Tribhuwan, Advocate for Respondent No.4
Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.5

                           AND
            964 WRIT PETITION NO. 12365 OF 2021

              ANIL CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLE
                         VERSUS
              THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
                               …..
Mr S. N. Patne, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr Nandkishor U. Yadav, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 4
Mr K. B. Jadhavar, AGP for Respondent Nos.2, 3 & 6/State
Mr D. P. Madkar, Advocate h/f Mr D. S. Manorkar, Advocate for
Respondent No.5

                               …..
                                                               14966.19wp
                                   (3)


                          CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT
                                         AND
                                  AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

                            DATE : 02nd JULY 2026



PER COURT :-


1.           Heard learned Advocates for the respective sides in all

these petitions. With their consent, taken up for final disposal.



2.           The grievance of the petitioners lies within a very narrow

compass. Properties of the petitioners have been already acquired by

the acquiring body and compensation is also paid. The grievance is

about non-payment of solatium amount, component and interest from

the date of claim. Though in these petitions, claim is made from the

date of receipt of compensation, however, the Hon’ble Apex Court in

the matter of National Highways Authority of India Vs. Tarsem

Singh and others (Review Petition (Civil) No.2528/2025 has granted

benefit of interest only from the date when the petitions were filed or

claim were made by the claimants.         Paragraph No.14 of the said

judgment reads as under:-
                                                            14966.19wp
                                 (4)

      “14. Considering the facts and circumstances explained in the
      instant proceedings along with the various submissions placed
      on record and with a view to balancing the equities regarding
      delay and the entitlements of the landowners, we issue the
      following directions:

            (i) All landowners whose claims re: the quantum and/or
            components of compensation for their lands acquired
            under the NH Act were alive on or after 28.03.2008, i.e.,
            they were pending before one of the prescribed fora, shall
            be entitled to seek addition of 'interest', 'solatium', and
            'interest on the solatium' to their compensation claim;

            (ii) In the cases where compensation claims are alive on
            the aforesaid date, but the landowner has claimed
            'interest'. 'solatium', and 'interest on solatium after
            28.03.2008, no interest on both components shall be
            payable for the period of delay. Such landowner shall be
            entitled to 'interest' and 'interest on solatium' only from
            the date on which such claims were raised; and

            (iii) If the claims of the landowners stood concluded prior
            to 28.03.2008, with no further appeal, Writ Petition,
            Special Leave Petition, etc., then such landowners are not
            entitled to seek reopening, review, or modification of the
            said decision for the purpose of claiming 'solatium' or
            'interest'.”


3.          Considering paragraph No.14 of the judgment in the

matter of National Highways Authority of India (supra), this Court

deems it appropriate to dispose of all these petitions with certain

directions. Accordingly, all these petitions are partly allowed. The
                                                           14966.19wp
                                 (5)

petitioners are held entitled to receive amount of solatium as well as

interest thereon. The said interest shall be payable from the date on

which these petitions have been filed.     Needless to state, if any

calculation is disputed by any of the parties, it is open for the said

parties to approach Arbitrator under the National Highways Act, as per

law.




[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]                 [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]
sjk


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.