The Union Of India And Others vs Mrs. Dipali De Majumder And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 258 Tri

                                  Page 1 of 4


                    HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                          AGARTALA

                                 W.A. No.74/2020

The Union of India and others
                                                             .....Appellant(s)

                           Versus

Mrs. Dipali De Majumder and others
                                                            .....Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s)                : Mr. Bidyut Majumder, Asstt. SG.

For Respondent(s)               : Mr. P. Datta, Advocate.


     HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AKIL KURESHI
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY

                                  ORDER

01/03/2021.

This Writ Appeal is filed by the Union of India as an acquiring

authority to challenge a judgment of the learned Single Judge dated

27.09.2019 passed in W.P. (C) No.874 of 2019.

The respondent No.1 herein was the original petitioner. A portion of

her agricultural land was acquired by a Notification, which was issued on

05.03.1983 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Another

land owner who owned the land in the neighbourhood and whose land was

also acquired in the same Notification had sought enhancement of the

compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer which was

partially granted and upon which the present petitioner had filed

application before the Collector claiming parity in compensation in terms

of Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act. The Collector passed an

order on 15.06.2004 on such application granting enhance compensation to

the petitioner @ of Rs.24,000/- per kani from originally allowed

Rs.15,000/- per kani. For years together, the Union of India did not satisfy

this fresh award. Thereupon the petitioner first approached the Land

Acquisition Officer, who under the communication dated 19.08.2017 to the

Union of India provided a full calculation of compensation payable to the

petitioner with solatium an interest. Even after service of this

communication since the Union of India did not pay the compensation, she

filed the present petition which was allowed by the learned Single Judge

by the impugned judgment directing the authorities to make payment to the

petitioner as per the calculation sheet enclosed with communication dated

19.08.2019 along with further interest from 30.08.2017 till payment.

While issuing notice on the stay petition in this Writ Appeal, on

04.01.2021, we had provided that there shall be stay against the execution

of the judgment of the learned Single Judge provided the Union of India

deposits the entire amount with further continued interest at the statutory

rate before the returnable date. Pursuant to such order, the Union of India

has deposited a sum of Rs.5,99,720/- before the Registry of this Court.

Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the entire

challenge of the Union of India is confined to the computation of interest

on the solatium which according to him would begin only from 19.09.2001

i.e. from the date of the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Sunder

vs. Union of India, reported in (2001) 7 SCC 211 as explained in the later

judgment in case of Gurpreet Singh vs. Union of India, reported in (2006)

8 SCC 457.

In facts of the present case, we are not inclined to examine this legal

contention. Ordinarily, the Court would insist that a person who is not

satisfied with the payment of compensation of land acquisition, despite an

award being passed, should approach the executing Court where all

disputes of correct calculation of payable compensation and interest can be

worked out. However, the facts in the present case are glaring. The land of

the petitioner was acquired way back in the year 1983. Till date, she has

not received fair compensation at market value for the land lost by her

under such acquisition. The amount disputed by the Union of India is also

extremely small. Further, Union of India is responsible for much of the

delay. After the Land Acquisition Officer passed his award under Section

28A of the Land Acquisition Act, for several years, there was no

compliance thereof. Even after the Land Acquisition Officer

communicated the full calculation of the payable compensation with

interest and solatium in the year 2017, Union of India took no steps.

Keeping the legal questions raised by the Union of India in this Writ

Appeal, the same is dismissed.

The Registry shall release the amount deposited by Union of India

towards Land Acquisition in favour of the original petitioner, respondent

No.1 herein by an account payee cheque or by transfer as per her

convenience.

Appeal disposed of accordingly. Pending application(s), if any, also

stands disposed of.

  (S.G. CHATTOPADHYAY), J                      (AKIL KURESHI), CJ




sima