UNION OF INDIA & ANR. versus DR. ASKET SINGH & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 6 S.C.R. 227 · Decided: 01-05-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: ABHAY S. OKA · Disposal: Dismissed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

* Author
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 227 : 2024 INSC 409
Union of India & Anr. 
v. 
Dr. Asket Singh & Ors.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 1636-1637 of 2016)
01 May 2024
[Abhay S. Oka* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Matter pertains to the challenge to the relief of solatium and interest 
on the compensation amount granted by the High Court.
Headnotes
Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 
1952 – s. 8(1)(a) – Compensation – Delay in payment of – 
Grant of solatium and interest by the High Court – Challenge 
to:
Held: Right to hold immovable property is no longer a fundamental 
right but is a right u/Art. 300A – On facts, land owned by the first 
respondent stood vested in the Central Government in the year 
1964 – Offer for payment of compensation was made by the 
Collector belatedly after 12 years in 1976 – Delay of more than 
12 years attributable solely to the Central Government – Since 
the respondents declined to accept the offer, the Arbitrator was 
appointed in 1976, it took slightly less than 20 years to conclude 
the proceedings – Nothing on record that the proceedings were 
delayed due to any conduct attributable to the first respondent – 
Delay in appointing the arbitrator must be attributed to the Central 
Government, as the Central Government took 12 years to offer 
compensation – In effect, market value prevailing on the date of 
acquisition was paid to the owners after lapse of more than 30 
years from the date of vesting – As there are no provisions under 
the 1952 Act to compensate the owner for the delay in making 
payment of compensation, in such cases, solatium and interest 
must be paid by the Central Government – Compensation must 
be paid to the owner of the acquired property within a reasonable 
time from the date on which the acquired property vested in the 
acquiring body – Requirement of making payment of compensation 
within a reasonable time from the date of vesting must be read 
228
[2024] 6 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
into the 1952 Act – Long delay of 12 years even in offering 
compensation would attract arbitrariness which is prohibited 
by Art. 14 – Considering the huge delay involved in payment 
of compensation, the High Court rightly granted solatium and 
interest – As the first respondent has been paid compensation 
7 years back, no costs imposed – Constitution of India – Arts. 
14, 300A. [Paras 7-10]
Case Law Cited
Harbans Singh Shanni Devi v. Union of India; Union 
of India v. Chajju Ram [2003] 3 SCR 647 : (2003) 5 
SCC 568; Dilawar Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors. 
[2010] 12 SCR 1059 : (2010) 14 SCC 357; Union of 
India v. Hari Krishan Khosla [1992] Supp. 1 SCR 620 : 
1993 Supp. 2 SCC 149 – referred to.
List of Acts
Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952.
List of Keywords
Compensation; Delay in payment of compensation; Grant of 
solatium; Grant of interest; Right to hold immovable property; 
Fundamental right; Delay; Date of acquisition; Arbitrariness; 
Costs.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal Nos. 1636-1637 
of 2016
From the Judgment and Order dated 29.04.2015 of the High Court 
of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in FAO Nos. 2307 and 2673 
of 1998
Appearances for Parties
Mukul Singh, Indira Bhakar, Sharath Nambiar, Shubham Saxena, 
Vineet Singh, Dr. Arun Kumar Yadav, T. S. Sabarish, Udai 
Khanna, Dr. N. Visakamurthy, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advs. for 
the Appellants.
Ms. Rajshree Bhatnagar, T. R. B. Sivakumar, Advs. for the 
Respondents.
[2024] 6 S.C.R. 
229
Union of India & Anr. v. Dr. Asket Singh & Ors.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Judgment
Abhay S. Oka, J.
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2.	
The facts of the case are glaring. The respondents are the owners 
of the lands subject matter of these appeals. At the instance of the 
Ministry of Defence, acquisition proceedings were initiated under 
the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 
(for short “the 1952 Act”). A notice of acquisition under Section 7 of 
the 1952 Act was issued on 26th March, 1964 which was published 
in the State Government Gazette on 3rd April, 1964. The vesting of 
the acquired property was complete on publication of the notice in 
the official gazette.
3.	
The provisions for grant of compensation in respect of the acquired 
land are found in Section 8 of the 1952 Act. The first option provided 
therein is to fix the compensation by an agreement between the 
acquiring body and 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.