National Highways Authority of India v. Tarsem Singh
Background
This Review Petition was filed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) seeking recall of an earlier order that had refused to clarify whether the Court's 2019 ruling in Tarsem Singh-I (holding that landowners whose land was acquired under the National Highways Act are entitled to solatium and interest, benefits earlier denied to them because a special provision excluded the ordinary Land Acquisition Act) applied prospectively or retrospectively. A batch of connected appeals from the Bombay and Chhattisgarh High Courts, where courts had directed time-bound payment of interest and solatium to landowners, was tagged along with this review petition since their outcome depended on it.
Decision Breakdown
The Court declined to reopen its earlier ruling on the ground that NHAI's rising financial liability could not by itself justify review, holding that constitutional guarantees of just compensation cannot be made contingent on the size of the fiscal burden. However, it clarified the practical scope of its earlier judgments: landowners whose compensation claims were still pending on or after 28.03.2008 can claim interest, solatium and interest on solatium; those who raised such claims after that date, despite their case being alive, will not get interest for the period of delay in raising the claim; and those whose cases had already concluded before 28.03.2008 with no pending appeal cannot reopen final decisions at all. The review petition was disposed of on these terms, and the tagged appeals were allowed, with the High Courts' orders remanded for recalculation of the compensation strictly per these directions, while clarifying that landowners already paid need not refund any amount.
Lesson Learnt
A final judgment that has attained finality cannot be reopened merely because a later, more favourable legal interpretation emerges: landowners who let their compensation claims go unchallenged for years lose the right to revive them, underscoring the importance of pursuing legal remedies without inordinate delay.