Sri Durga Sankar Majumder vs Sri Nani Gopal Mallik
2021 Latest Caselaw 511 Tri

                                Page 1




                   HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          AGARTALA
                      LA APP 35 OF 2019
  1. Sri Durga Sankar Majumder,
     son of late Dwijendralal Majumder, resident of Amlapara,
     Belonia, P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
  2. Sri Shibsankar Majumder,
     son of late Dwijendralal Majumder, resident of Amlapara,
     Belonia, P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
  3. Smt. Uma Majumder,
     wife of Sri Suku Saha, resident of Shaltila, Belonia,
     P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
  4. Smt. Gouri Majumder,
     wife of Sri Biplab Majumder, resident of 1 No. Tilla, Belonia,
     P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
                                                   ----Appellant(s)
                 Versus
  1. Sri Nani Gopal Mallik,
     son of late Bharat Chandra Mallik, resident of College Square,
     P.O. Sarashima, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
  2. Sri Hari Bhusan Saha,
     son of late Ram Krishna Saha, resident of Jadunath Tilla,
     Belonia, P.O. Belonia, P.S. Belonia, District- South Tripura
                                               ----Respondent(s)
For Appellant(s)            :      Mr. Samar Das, Advocate
For Respondent(s)           :      Mr. SM Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate
                                   Ms. A. Paul, Advocate
Date of hearing & delivery
Of Judgment & Order        :       16.04.2021
Whether fit for reporting   :      Yes/No
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
                   JUDGMENT(ORAL)

This judgment and award dated 03.10.2018 passed by

the learned LA Judge, South Tripura, Belonia, in L.A. (Ref.) 40 of

2015 is under challenge before this learned court.

Page 2

2. By a notification, the land of the appellants has been

acquired. During proceeding before the LA Collector, it transpired

that the name of the respondents was recorded as forceful occupier

in the khatian (Record of Right). Since there was dispute between

the ownership of the land in question, the LA Collector referred the

matter to the court of learned LA Judge for apportionment of the

award.

3. The learned LA Judge after hearing the parties and

considering the evidences and materials on record had passed an

award wherein the respondents were given the entire awarded

amount vide judgment dated 03.10.2018. Being aggrieved, the

original land owner has preferred the instant appeal.

4. The contention of the appellants is that vide registered

Sale Deed no. I-3061 dated 25.09.1978, the mother of the

appellants was the owner of the land and by way of succession the

appellants became the owner.

5. I have gone through the judgment and the records. It is

found that the respondents could not prove the adverse possession.

However, it is established that the appellants are the owner and the

respondents are the occupier of the land, in question. Be that as it

may, in my opinion, the award should be apportioned between the

appellants and the respondents in equal shares.

Page 3

6. Accordingly, it is ordered that the entire awarded amount

shall be divided into two equal shares between the appellants and

the respondents.

7. With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant

appeal stands allowed to the extent, as indicated above, and thus,

disposed of.

Send back the L.C.Rs.

JUDGE

Saikat