Vijay Mansaram Pawar vs The Govt Of India Throu. Deputy Sec. ...

ik-117850507 Bombay High Court 18 December 2025 • WRIT PETITION NO. 16744 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16745 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16746 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16749 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16750 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16751 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16752 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16754 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION NO. 16762 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34233 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34239 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34282 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34343 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34340 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34351 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34356 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34370 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34368 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34361 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34383 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34377 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34873 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34379 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34381 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34386 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34382 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34389 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34392 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34394 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34395 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34398 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34401 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34432 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34444 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34633 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34784 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34791 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34607 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34639 OF 2025; WRIT PETITION (St.) NO. 34435 OF 2025; Writ Petition No.6771 of 2021; Civil Appeal No.7064 of 2019; Writ Petition No.13634 of 2025; Writ Petition No. 16370 of 2023; Writ Petition No. 14309 of 2025; Writ Petition No. 7644 of 2024; Writ Petition No. 16370 of 2023; Writ Petition No. 13634 of 2025 • 21 min read

Judges (2)

Counsel (1)

Parties (4)

Case Significance

Vijay Mansaram Pawar vs The Govt Of India Throu. Deputy Sec. ... is a Bombay High Court decision dated December 18, 2025 (citation: ik-117850507). Multiple landowners filed writ petitions seeking solatium and interest on land acquisition awards under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for NHAI highway projects. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India vs Tarsem Singh, the Division Bench directed petitioners to furnish copies of acquisition awards to the Competent Authority, who must compute solatium and interest within eight weeks, with NHAI to deposit amounts within three months. Disposition was subject to the Supreme Court' The bench comprised Justices Aarti Sathe and G.S. Kulkarni. The judgment was delivered by Justice G.S. Kulkarni. Counsel appearing: A.S. Bapat (counsel for petitioner).

Summary

Multiple landowners filed writ petitions seeking solatium and interest on land acquisition awards under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for NHAI highway projects. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Union of India vs Tarsem Singh, the Division Bench directed petitioners to furnish copies of acquisition awards to the Competent Authority, who must compute solatium and interest within eight weeks, with NHAI to deposit amounts within three months. Disposition was subject to the Supreme Court's pending review petition in Tarsem Singh.

What was the outcome of Vijay Mansaram Pawar vs The Govt Of India Throu. Deputy Sec. ...?

Multiple landowners filed writ petitions seeking solatium and interest on land acquisition awards under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 for NHAI highway projects. Relying on the Supreme Court judgment ...

Judgment

Read the full judgment on the official India Courts portal.

Read on Indian Kanoon

Source: Indian Kanoon (ik-117850507)