RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITEDversusTHE METRO RAILWAY, KOLKATA

1142                       [2019]
                SUPREME COURT     8 S.C.R. 1142
                               REPORTS                      [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A                     RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED
                                         v.
                      THE METRO RAILWAY, KOLKATA
                 (Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14078 of 2019)
 B                                JULY 17, 2019
                  [ARUN MISHRA AND M. R. SHAH, JJ.]
              Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land
       Acquisition, Rehabilitization and Resettlement Act, 2013 – s.30 (1)
       and (3) – Metro Railways (construction of works) Act, 1978 – Lands
 C
       owned by petitioner were acquired for the purpose of construction
       of the Metro railway – Petitioner claimed compensation under the
       provisions of the 2013 Act – The competent authority awarded
       Rs.1,48,29,312 towards the market value and a sum of Rs.6,75,526/
       - on account of value of structure – However, appellate authority
 D     enhanced the amount of compensation and awarded a sum of
       Rs.6,20,52,215/- on account of market value of structure, a further
       sum at the rate of 12% p.a. on market value in terms of sub-s. (3)
       of s.30 of the Act, 2013 and a solatium @ 100% on the total
       compensation i.e. total award of Rs.9,94,18, 980/— – Aggrieved,
       Metro Railways preferred application u/Art.227 – High Court held
 E
       that the solatium payable under sub.s.(1) of s.30 has to be calculated
       only on the market value of the land acquired and the assets and
       not on the total arrived at upon assessing the market value with
       additional 12% p.a. – Consequently, High Court directed to reassess
       the total amount payable – On appeal, held: S.28 of the Act provides
 F     for parameters to be considered by the Collector in determining the
       compensation to be awarded for the land acquired, which includes
       the market value as determined u/s.26 of the Act and other
       parameters, but does not include the amount calculated and payable
       under sub-s.(3) of s.30 of the 2013 Act – Also, on fair reading of
       the 2013 Act, namely, ss.26 to 30, the High Court rightly observed
 G
       that solatium amount to be determined and calculated under sub-
       s.(1) of s.30 of the 2013 Act shall be equivalent to 100% of the
       market value determined u/s.26 of the Act plus the value of all assets
       attached to the land i.e. the total amount of compensation and shall

 H
                                       1142
 RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,                      1143
                    KOLKATA

not include an amount calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. on such       A
market value payable under sub-s.(3) of s.30 of the 2013 Act –
Thus, Special leave petitions dismissed.
      Dismissing the Special Leave Petitions, the Court
      HELD: Whether the solatium as contemplated under sub-
section (1) of Section 30 of the Right to Fair Compensation and        B
Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitization and
Resettlement Act, 2013, has to be calculated only on the market
value and the assets thereon or the sum total of the market value,
the assets and 12% per annum on the market value stipulated
under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act?                   C
      While considering the aforesaid question, the relevant
provisions of the 2013 Act and the scheme for determination of
the amount of compensation for the land acquired are required
to be referred to and considered. The relevant provisions of the
2013 Act are Sections 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30. Section 26 of the         D
Act provides for determination of market value of the land by the
Collector. Section 27 of the Act provides for determination of
the amount of compensation and Section 28 of the Act provides
the parameters to be considered by the Collector in determination
of the award. Section 29 of the Act provides for determination of
the value of things attached to the land or building. Section 30 of    E
the Act provides that the Collector having determined the total
compensation to be paid, shall, to arrive at the final award, impose
a “Solatium” amount equivalent to one hundred per cent of the
compensation amount. Sub-section (3) of Section 30 further
provides that in addition to the market value of the land provided     F
under Section 26, the Collector shall, in every case, award the
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 sub-section (2) of Section 4,
in respect of such land, till the date of the award of the Collector
or the date of taking possession of the land, whichever is earlier.    G
Therefore, on conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions and
the scheme of the Act, it is to be seen that before the final award
is passed by the Collector, the Collector has to determine the

                                                                       H
1144            SUPREME COURT REPORTS                      [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A     market value of the land as provided under Section 26 of the Act.
       That, thereafter, after determination of the market value of the
       land as provided under Section 26 of the Act, the Collector has
       to determine the amount of compensation as per Section 27 of
       the Act, which includes the market value of the land as well as
       the value of all assets attached to the land. Therefore, the amount
 B
       of compensation determined shall be including the market value
       of the land to be acquired (as per Section 26 of the 2013 Act) and
       the value of all assets attached to the land. The determination of
       the value of the things attached to the land or building shall be as
       per Section 29 of the 2013 Act. Over and above the amount of
 C     compensation so determined by the Collector as per Sections
       26, 27 and 28 of the 2013 Act, at the time of the final award, the
       Collector has to impose a “solatium” amount equivalent to one
       hundred per cent of the compensation amount, as per Sections
       29 and 30 of the 2013 Act. The land owner whose land has been
       acquired shall also be entitled to, in addition to the market value
 D
       of the land provided under Section 26 of the Act, an amount
       calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value.
       Therefore, on conjoint reading of the aforesaid provisions and
       the scheme of the 2013 Act, the final award declared by the
       Collector shall be in three parts/components, namely the amount
 E     of compensation (which shall include the market value of the land
       to be acquired and the value of the assets attached to the land);
       the solatium determined and payable under sub-section (1) of
       Section 30 which shall be equivalent to one hundred per cent of
       the compensation amount (the market value + value of assets
       attached to the land) and the amount calculated at the rate of
 F
       12% per annum on such market value (as per sub-section (3) of
       Section 30 of the 2013 Act). All the three components would be
       independent which shall ultimately form part of the final award.
       At this stage, it is required to be noted that unlike the market
       value (as defined under Section 3(u) of the Act), the
 G     “Compensation” is not defined. However, on reading Sections
       26 and 27 of the Act, it is to be held that the total amount of
       compensation shall be the market value of the land to be acquired
       as determined under Section 26 of the Act and the value of assets
       attached to the land determined under Section 29 of the Act. It is
 H
 RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,                          1145
                    KOLKATA

required to be noted that in sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the          A
2013 Act, the word used is “Solatium” amount equivalent to one
hundred per cent of the COMPENSATION AMOUNT. It is also
required to be noted that unlike Section 23 of the old Land
Acquisition Act, 1894, under the 2013 Act, the award of solatium
and the additional amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum
                                                                           B
on such market value is provided in the different section. Even
the solatium payable under the old Land Acquisition Act was at
the rate of 30 per cent on the market value and, in the new 2013
Act, the solatium amount is equivalent to one hundred per cent
of the compensation amount. Therefore, there is a material change
in determination of the market value, determination of the amount          C
of compensation, determination of the amount of solatium and
declaration of the final award. Therefore, on a fair reading of the
relevant provisions of the 2013 Act, namely Sections 26 to 30,
we are of the opinion that the High Court has rightly observed
and held that the solatium amount to be determined and calculated
                                                                           D
under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act shall be
equivalent to 100% of the market value determined under Section
26 of the Act plus the value of all assets attached to the land i.e.
the total amount of the compensation and shall not include an
amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market
value payable under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013              E
Act. On fair reading of the aforesaid provisions and the scheme
of the 2013 Act, this Court is of the opinion that any other
interpretation would be contrary to the scheme of the 2013 Act.
[Para 4] [1149-E-H; 1150-A-H; 1151-A-H]
       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition               F
(Civil) No. 14078 of 2019.
      From the Judgment and Order dated 07.02.2019 of the High
Court at Calcutta in C.O. No. 1895 of 2018.
      With
                                                                           G
      S.L.P.(C) No. 14170 of 2019.
     Huzefa Ahmadi,Sr.Adv., Amit P., Ms. Neha Tandon, R. B.
Phookan, Shailesh Madiyal, Sujit Bhattacharya, Advs. for the petitioner.

                                                                           H
1146             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                            [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A            The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
              M. R. SHAH, J.
              1. The short question which is posed for consideration of this Court
       in the present Special Leave Petitions is as to whether the solatium as
       contemplated under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the Right to Fair
 B     Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and
       Resettlement Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘2013 Act’) has
       to be calculated only on the market value and assets or the sum total of
       the market value, the assets and additional 12% per annum on the market
       value stipulated under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act?
 C            2. That the lands owned by the petitioner herein came to be acquired
       for the purpose of construction of the Metro railway. That the said land
       was acquired under the provisions of the Metro Railways (Construction
       of Works) Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘1978 Act’). That the
       Central Government published a notification under Section 10 of the 1978
 D     Act, inter alia, declaring that the said land should be acquired in connection
       with the aforesaid project. That, in the year 2014, the petitioner filed an
       application under Section 13(1) of the 1978 Act, inter alia, praying for the
       compensation in respect of the said land and the same was registered as
       Claim Case No. NGA-32 OF 2014. That, on 05.12.2016, the petitioner
       filed an application for amendment of the original claim, inter alia, praying
 E     for compensation to be determined under the provisions of the 2013 Act.
       That the said application for amendment came to be allowed.
             2.1 That by an order dated 16.12.2016, the competent authority
       disposed of the aforesaid claim case awarding Rs.1,48,29,312/- towards
       the market value and a sum of Rs.6,75,526/- within two months from the
 F     date of the order on account of value of structure.
              2.2 That, on 11.01.2017, the petitioner preferred an appeal under
       Section 13(3) of the 1978 Act before the Appellate Authority, which was
       registered as Claim Appeal No. 1 of 2017. That, by an order dated
       28.02.2018, the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal and enhanced
 G     the amount of compensation and held that the petitioner is entitled to get
       a sum of Rs.6,20,52,215/- on account of market value of the land and a
       further sum of Rs.6,75,526/- on account of value of structure. The
       Appellate Authority also held that the petitioner shall be entitled to a
       further sum at the rate of 12% per annum on market value in terms of
       sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act and also held that the
 H
 RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,                             1147
             KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]

petitioner is entitled to get solatium @ 100% on the total compensation       A
i.e. Rs.6,20,52,215/- (market value) + Rs.6,75,526/- (on account of value
of structure) + Rs.3,66,91,239/- (further sum at the rate of 12% per
annum on market value in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the
2013 Act) = Rs.9,94,18,980/-.
       2.3 That, being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order passed       B
by the Appellate Authority dated 28.02.2018, the respondent preferred
an application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the
High Court of Calcutta, being C.O. No. 1895 of 2018. That, by the
impugned judgment and order dated 07.02.2019, the High Court has
partly allowed the said revision application and has held that the solatium
payable under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act has to be         C
calculated only on the market value of the land acquired and the assets
thereon and not on the total arrived at upon assessing the market value
with additional 12% per annum thereon (further sum payable under sub-
section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act). Consequently, the High
Court has directed to reassess the total amount payable to the petitioner.    D
       2.4 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment
and order passed by the High Court holding and directing to determine
and to pay the solatium payable under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of
the 2013 Act on the market value of the land acquired and the assets
thereon and excluding the further sum at the rate of 12% per annum            E
payable under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act, the original
owner-the petitioner herein has preferred the present Special Leave
Petitions.
       2.5 Therefore, the short question which is posed for consideration
of this Court is as to whether the solatium payable under sub-section (1)     F
of Section 30 of the 2013 Act has to be calculated only on the market
value of the land acquired and the assets thereon or on the total arrived
at upon adding the additional 12% per annum on the market value?
       3. Shri Huzefa Ahmadi, learned Senior Advocate appearing on
behalf of the petitioner -original land owner-original claimant has           G
vehemently submitted that the High Court has committed a grave error
in holding that the solatium payable under sub-section (1) of Section 30
of the 2013 Act has to be calculated only on the market value of the
land acquired and the assets thereon, and not on the total arrived at upon
adding further sum of 12% per annum on market value.
                                                                              H
1148             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                            [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A           3.1 It is vehemently submitted by the learned Senior Counsel
       appearing on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned judgment and
       order passed by the High Court holding that the solatium has to be
       calculated only on the market value arrived at and the assets thereon
       and not on the total arrived at adding the further sum of 12% per annum
       on market value, is against the scheme of the 2013 Act for awarding the
 B
       compensation for the land acquired.
             3.2 It is further submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing
       on behalf of the petitioner that the amount of solatium stipulated under
       sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act, which is to the amount
       equivalent to 100% of the compensation amount, shall include additional
 C     12% per annum on the market value stipulated under sub-section (3) of
       Section 30 of the 2013 Act.
              3.3 It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel appearing on
       behalf of the petitioner that, as per the scheme of the 2013 Act, Section
       26 of the Act refers to the manner in which the market value as defined
 D     in Section 3(u) has to be determined by the Collector. Section 27 of the
       Act refers to the determination of the amount of compensation to be
       paid to the land owner by including all assets attached to the land. It is
       submitted that Section 28 provides the parameters to be considered by
       the Collector for determining the amount of the compensation to be
 E     awarded for the land acquired. It is submitted that the expression
       “compensation” has to be defined in the Act and would therefore take
       into its fold any amount statutorily due and payable to a person whose
       land stands acquired under the Act.
              3.4 It is submitted by Shri Ahmadi appearing on behalf of the
 F     petitioner that sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act provides,
       inter alia, that the solatium amount is equivalent to 100% of the
       compensation amount. It is submitted that sub-section (3) of Section 30
       of the 2013 Act expressly provides that the Collector shall award in
       addition to the market value of the land under Section 26, an amount
       calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value. It is
 G     submitted that said amount at the rate of 12% is yet another kind of
       compensation which is payable to the land owner in lieu of the compulsory
       acquisition. It is submitted that, therefore, while construing/considering
       the “total compensation” under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013
       Act, the sum payable at the rate of 12% per annum under sub-section
 H     (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act is required to be included. It is submitted
 RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,                                1149
             KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]

that the sum payable under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act         A
shall be a part of the award while determining and paying and
compensation for the land acquired. It is submitted that as 2013 Act is a
beneficiary Act, a liberal interpretation should be adopted in favour of
the land owners whose land has been compulsory acquired.
       3.5 It is further submitted by the learned Senior Advocate appearing      B
on behalf of the petitioner that even sub-section (3) of Section 69 of the
Act also provides that solatium shall be 100% over the “total
compensation” amount. It is submitted that, therefore, a beneficial
construction of sub-section (3) of Section 69 would illustrate the legislative
intent which is that solatium under sub-section (1) of Section 30 would
be the aggregate of 100% of the market value determined under Section            C
26, the asset value determined under Section 27 of the Act and 12% of
the market value determined under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the
2013 Act. He submitted that any interpretation contrary to the above,
would be contrary to the Statement of Objects and Reasons of the 2013
Act.                                                                             D
      3.6 Making the above submissions, it is prayed to allow the present
Special Leave Petitions.
       4. We have heard the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
petitioner at length. As observed hereinabove, the short question posed
for consideration of this Court in the present Special Leave Petitions is        E
as to whether the solatium as contemplated under sub-section (1) of
Section 30 of the 2013 Act, has to be calculated only on the market
value and the assets thereon or the sum total of the market value, the
assets and 12% per annum on the market value stipulated under sub-
section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act? While considering the aforesaid       F
question, the relevant provisions of the 2013 Act and the scheme for
determination of the amount of compensation for the land acquired are
required to be referred to and considered. The relevant provisions of
the 2013 Act are Sections 26, 27, 28, 29 and 30. Section 26 of the Act
provides for determination of market value of the land by the Collector.
Section 27 of the Act provides for determination of the amount of                G
compensation and Section 28 of the Act provides the parameters to be
considered by the Collector in determination of the award. Section 29
of the Act provides for determination of the value of things attached to
the land or building. Section 30 of the Act provides that the Collector
having determined the total compensation to be paid, shall, to arrive at         H
1150             SUPREME COURT REPORTS                             [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A     the final award, impose a “Solatium” amount equivalent to one hundred
       per cent of the compensation amount. Sub-section (3) of Section 30
       further provides that in addition to the market value of the land provided
       under Section 26, the Collector shall, in every case, award the 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
 B
       notification under sub-section (2) of Section 4, in respect of such land,
       till the date of the award of the Collector or the date of taking possession
       of the land, whichever is earlier. Therefore, on conjoint reading of the
       aforesaid provisions and the scheme of the Act, it is to be seen that
       before the final award is passed by the Collector, the Collector has to
 C     determine the market value of the land as provided under Section 26 of
       the Act. That, thereafter, after determination of the market value of the
       land as provided under Section 26 of the Act, the Collector has to
       determine the amount of compensation as per Section 27 of the Act,
       which includes the market value of the land as well as the value of all
       assets attached to the land. Therefore, the amount of compensation
 D
       determined shall be including the market value of the land to be acquired
       (as per Section 26 of the 2013 Act) and the value of all assets attached
       to the land. The determination of the value of the things attached to the
       land or building shall be as per Section 29 of the 2013 Act. Over and
       above the amount of compensation so determined by the Collector as
 E     per Sections 26, 27 and 28 of the 2013 Act, at the time of the final
       award, the Collector has to impose a “solatium” amount equivalent to
       one hundred per cent of the compensation amount, as per Sections 29
       and 30 of the 2013 Act. The land owner whose land has been acquired
       shall also be entitled to, in addition to the market value of the land provided
       under Section 26 of the Act, an amount calculated at the rate of 12% per
 F
       annum on such market value. Therefore, on conjoint reading of the
       aforesaid provisions and the scheme of the 2013 Act, the final award
       declared by the Collector shall be in three parts/components, namely the
       amount of compensation (which shall include the market value of the
       land to be acquired and the value of the assets attached to the land); the
 G     solatium determined and payable under sub-section (1) of Section 30
       which shall be equivalent to one hundred per cent of the compensation
       amount (the market value + value of assets attached to the land) and the
       amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value
       (as per sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act). All the three
 H
 RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,                             1151
             KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]

components would be independent which shall ultimately form part of           A
the final award. At this stage, it is required to be noted that unlike the
market value (as defined under Section 3(u) of the Act), the
“Compensation” is not defined. However, on reading Sections 26 and
27 of the Act, it is to be held that the total amount of compensation shall
be the market value of the land to be acquired as determined under
                                                                              B
Section 26 of the Act and the value of assets attached to the land
determined under Section 29 of the Act. It is required to be noted that
in sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act, the word used is
“Solatium” amount equivalent to one hundred per cent of the
COMPENSATION AMOUNT. At this stage, it is required to be
noted that Section 28 of the Act provides for parameters to be considered     C
by the Collector in determining the compensation to be awarded for the
land acquired, which includes the market value as determined under
Section 26 of the Act and other parameters, but does not include the
amount calculated and payable under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of
the 2013 Act. It is also required to be noted that unlike Section 23 of
                                                                              D
the old Land Acquisition Act, 1894, under the 2013 Act, the award of
solatium and the additional amount calculated at the rate of 12% per
annum on such market value is provided in the different section. Even
the solatium payable under the old Land Acquisition Act was at the rate
of 30 per cent on the market value and, in the new 2013 Act, the solatium
amount is equivalent to one hundred per cent of the compensation amount.      E
Therefore, there is a material change in determination of the market
value, determination of the amount of compensation, determination of
the amount of solatium and declaration of the final award. Therefore,
on a fair reading of the relevant provisions of the 2013 Act, namely
Sections 26 to 30, we are of the opinion that the High Court has rightly
                                                                              F
observed and held that the solatium amount to be determined and
calculated under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act shall be
equivalent to 100% of the market value determined under Section 26 of
the Act plus the value of all assets attached to the land i.e. the total
amount of the compensation and shall not include an amount calculated
at the rate of 12% per annum on such market value payable under sub-          G
section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act. On fair reading of the aforesaid
provisions and the scheme of the 2013 Act, we are of the opinion that
any other interpretation would be contrary to the scheme of the 2013
Act.
                                                                              H
1152                SUPREME COURT REPORTS                       [2019] 8 S.C.R.


 A            4.1 Insofar as the reliance placed by the learned counsel for the
       petitioner upon Section 69 of the 2013 Act is concerned, it is required to
       be noted that Section 69 of the Act provides for the determination of the
       award/final award, which shall include the amount of compensation
       determined as per Sections 26, 27, 28 and 29 of the 2013 Act; the
       additional amount calculated at the rate of 12% per annum on such
 B
       market value determined and payable under sub-section (1) of Section
       30 of the 2013 Act and solatium at the rate of one hundred per cent over
       the total compensation amount determined and payable under sub-section
       (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act. Determination of the final award
       which shall be including the aforesaid three components, shall be different
 C     than that of the determination of amount of compensation. The amount
       of compensation is one part of the final award. Therefore, the submission
       on behalf of the petitioner relying upon Section 69 of the 2013 Act that
       the solatium amount equivalent to one hundred per cent of the
       compensation amount includes the amount calculated at the rate of 12%
       on such market value (as per sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013
 D
       Act) has no substance and cannot be accepted. What is provided under
       sub-section (1) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act is the “compensation
       amount” and not the total amount payable as per the final award. The
       total amount of compensation payable would be only that amount
       compensation determined as per Sections 26 to 29 of the 2013 Act.
 E            5. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is held
       that the solatium as contemplated under sub-section (1) of Section 30 of
       the 2013 Act has to be calculated only on the market value plus the
       value of the assets attached to the land i.e. total compensation amount
       as determined as per Sections 26, 27 and 28 of the 2013 Act which shall
 F     not include the additional amount at the rate of 12% per annum on such
       market value as payable under sub-Section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013
       Act. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the High
       Court. Both these Special Leave Petitions fail and deserve to be dismissed
       and are accordingly dismissed.
 G
       Ankit Gyan                                                    SLPs dismissed.




 H