MANAV BHANOT Vs. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) The only dispute herein is as to whether the claim of solatium, interest and interest on solatium, insofar as the acquisition made under the National Highways Act, 1956 [Hereinafter referred to as 'the NH Act'], is to be computed under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 [Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 1894'] or the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 [Hereinafter referred to as 'the Act of 2013'].

(3.) Sri Harin P. Raval, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant would rely on Union of India & Another v. Tarsem Singh & Others; 2025 SCC OnLine SC 235, (Tarsem Singh-II). He specifically refers to Paragraph 19 of Tarsem Singh II and points out that in declining the prayer for prospective operation of Union of India & Another v. Tarsem Singh & Others; (2019) 9 SCC 304 (Tarsem Singh-I), this Court has specifically noticed that there could be no differentiation, with respect to the benefit of solatium and interest, between a landowner whose land was acquired on 31/12/2014 and on the very next day i.e.,1/1/2015, the date on which the Ordinance brought into effect the application of the Act of 2013 to the acquisitions under the NH Act. Hence, it is the contention of the appellant, the landowner, that he is entitled to the full benefits under the Act of 2013.