https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293093 Section 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956 was held unconstitutional to the extent it excluded solatium and interest otherwise payable on compulsory acquisition. The Court treated solatium as part of compensation for the compulsory taking of property and found no rational connection between the 1997 amendment's object of speeding acquisition and the denial of those benefits. It further held that landowners acquired under the National Highways Act could not be classified differently from those under the Land Acquisition Act merely because a different statute applied, as that distinction had no relevant bearing on compensation and offended Article 14. The later 2013 compensation regime reinforced this conclusion. en-us Thu, 19 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Apr 2025 18:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293093 Section 3J of the National Highways Act, 1956 was held unconstitutional to the extent it excluded solatium and interest otherwise payable on compulsory acquisition. The Court treated solatium as part of compensation for the compulsory taking of property and found no rational connection between the 1997 amendment's object of speeding acquisition and the denial of those benefits. It further held that landowners acquired under the National Highways Act could not be classified differently from those under the Land Acquisition Act merely because a different statute applied, as that distinction had no relevant bearing on compensation and offended Article 14. The later 2013 compensation regime reinforced this conclusion. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 19 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293093