Gauhati High Court

Page No.# 1/3 vs The Collector And Anr on 2 June, 2025

Author: Devashis Baruah

Bench: Devashis Baruah

                                                                          Page No.# 1/3

GAHC010056922025




                                                                   undefined

                             THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                               Case No. : LA.App./2/2025

          PRATIMA DEVI AND 4 ORS
          W/O LATE BIRENDRA NATH SARMAH

          2: GUNINDRA NATH SARMA
           S/O LATE BIRENDRA NATH SARMAH

          3: SRI MUKUL SARMAH
           SON OF LATE BIRENDRA NATH SARMAH

          4: SRI RATUL SARMAH
           SON OF LATE BIRENDRA NATH SARMAH

          5: SRI DWIPEN SARMA
           SON OF LATE BIRENDRA NATH SARMAH
          ALL ARE RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE MAJIRGAON
          AZARA
           KAMRUP METRO
          ASSA

          VERSUS

          THE COLLECTOR AND ANR
          KAMRUP METRO

          2:THE PROJECT DIRECTOR
           NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA (MINISTRY OF ROAD
          TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS

     For the Petitioner(s)           : Mr. B. M. Deka, Advocate

     For the Respondent(s)           : Mr. T. R. Gogoi, Government Advocate
                                                                        Page No.# 2/3


                                   BEFORE
                    HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                     ORDER

Date : 02.06.2025

Heard Mr. B. M. Deka, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellants and Mr. T. R. Gogoi, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent No.1.

2. This is an appeal filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 against the judgment and order dated 06.12.2024 by which the appeal was dismissed.

3. The learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the learned Court of the District Judge, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati failed to take into account that it was the duty of the Collector to adduce evidence as regards the sufficiency of the compensation which was not done. The learned counsel further submitted that the Reference Court has presumed that the compensation so awarded i.e. Rs.2,70,000/- was proper and accordingly erred in law.

4. As per the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Reference Court did not take into consideration that the appellants were entitled to solatium @30% in terms with Section 23(2) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The learned counsel further submitted that the compensation was also not adjudicated by taking into account Section 23(1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in respect to the interest between dates from the date of notification under Section 4 to the date of passing of the award. The learned counsel further submitted that Section 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 was also not taken into consideration in the proper Page No.# 3/3

perspective.

5. Taking into account the said grounds of objection, the instant appeal is admitted.

6. Call for the records.

7. Steps be taken upon the respondent No.2 by way of Registered Post with A/D as well as through usual process within 3 (three) days.

8. As Mr. T. R. Gogoi, the learned counsel appears on behalf of the respondent No.1, extra copies of the instant appeal be furnished upon him within 2 (two) days.

9. List this matter after completion of service and receipt of the LCR.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant