RFA 95 of 2001. 7.12.2009 Present: Mr. J.L.Bhardwaj, counsel for the appellants. Mr. R.K.Bawa, Advocate General, with Mr. R.K.Sharma and Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. AGs for respondents 1 to 3. The only point for consideration in this appeal is the entitlement of the appellants herein for interest on solatium. The learned reference Court while disposing of the Reference Petitions, did not grant interest on the solatium so awarded. This part of the judgment cannot be sustained. In RFA 66 of 2003 titled Hem Raj v. H.P.P.W.D. & others, decided on 6.8.2003, this Court dealing with the question of grant of interest on solatium, has held: “6. Coming to the second question of allowing interest on solatium. This plea urged on behalf of the appellant needs to be upheld. Reason being that so far as solatium is concerned for all intents and purposes, it is one of the components of compensation payable to a person interested. In fact, it is in the nature of compulsory acquisition charges payable at a fixed rate on the compensation assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector/ Court. It cannot be in any situation be either separated or treated as not forming as integral part of the compensation. -2- Because a person who is not willing to part with the acquired property is allowed this benefit by operation of law for parting with the same. In these circmstances, interest is payable on the solatium also in addition to the price of land, trees, building etc. etc. as may be assessed by the Land Acquisition Collector or determined by the Court while answering a reference before it. Even otherwise this question is no more res integra, in view of the decision in the case of Sunder v. Union of India, (2001) 7 SCC 211. 7. No other point is urged. 8. In view of the aforesaid discussion these appeals are partly allowed and as a consequence of it, it is held that appellants are entitled to interest on the amount of solatium awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector, as well as by the Court below. Such calculations will be made by the respondents. Then the calculated amount in terems of this judgment be deposited by the respondents by or before 30.11.2003. In case needful is not done, respondents will be free to levy execution for recovery of this amount. No costs.” This appeal is partly allowed. The -3- judgment and order of the learned Reference Court is modified to the extent that the appellants herein shall be entitled to the interest on the amount of solatium as awarded to them. December 7, 2009 (PC). (Dev Darshan Sud), J.