RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED versus THE METRO RAILWAY, KOLKATA
[2019] 8 S.C.R. 1142, Supreme Court of India, 2019
Outcome: Unknown
Segment: Ratio
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1142
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED
v.
THE METRO RAILWAY, KOLKATA
(Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 14078 of 2019)
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
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
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
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
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
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
   [2019] 8 S.C.R. 1142
1142
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1143
not include an amount calculated at the rate of 12% p.a. on such
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
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?
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
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
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
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.
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
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,
KOLKATA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1144
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
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 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 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 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 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 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
“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
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1145
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. 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
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
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
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
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
(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
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.
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,
KOLKATA
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1146
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
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
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?
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
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
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
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
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
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1147
petitioner is entitled to get solatium @ 100% on the total compensation
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
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
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.
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
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)
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
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.
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,
KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1148
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
(3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act is required to be included. It is submitted
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1149
that the sum payable under sub-section (3) of Section 30 of the 2013 Act
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,
KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1150
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1151
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
“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 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
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
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.
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
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-
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.
RB DEALERS PRIVATE LIMITED v. THE METRO RAILWAY,
KOLKATA [M. R. SHAH, J.]
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
1152
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 8 S.C.R.
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
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
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
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.
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
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.
Ankit Gyan
SLPs dismissed.