Bombay High Court
RAJESHWAR ALIAS RAJSHAKHAR CHANDRAKANT CHINCHOLEversusTHE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to solatium and interest payable from the date of filing of the writ petitions, in line with the Supreme Court’s directions in NHAI v. Tarsem Singh.
Summary
The petitioners, whose lands were acquired under the National Highways Act, had received compensation but alleged that the statutory solatium and interest components were not paid. They filed writ petitions seeking the unpaid amounts. The Court examined the Supreme Court’s decision in National Highways Authority of India v. Tarsem Singh, which limited interest on solatium to the date of filing when claims were made after 28‑03‑2008. Applying that precedent, the Court held that the petitioners are entitled to the solatium and interest, with interest accruing from the date the writ petitions were filed. The Court directed that any disputed calculations may be referred to an arbitrator under the National Highways Act. Consequently, the petitions were partly allowed, granting the relief sought.
Issues considered
- Whether landowners are entitled to solatium and interest on compensation under the National Highways Act.
- From which date interest on solatium should accrue – the date of claim or the date of filing of the writ petition.
- Whether the Supreme Court’s guidelines in NHAI v. Tarsem Singh apply to the present petitions.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- land acquisition
- compensation
- solatium
- interest
- National Highways Act
- writ petition
- partial relief
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:26300-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
Checking your session…