The Deputy Chief Engineer ... vs Sri Hari Kumar Goswami & Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 575 Tri

                                   Page 1 of 3




                       HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                             AGARTALA
                            LA App. No.59 of 2021
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), N.F. Railway, Agartala.
                                                       ...... Appellant(s)
                              VERSUS
Sri Hari Kumar Goswami & another
                                                          ...... Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s)                  : Mr. A. De, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)                 : Mr. P. Rathor, Advocate,
                                    Mr. D.C. Saha, Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. INDRAJIT MAHANTY

Order 02/06/2022

Heard learned counsel for the respective parties.

Though this matter has come up for admission, on consent of

the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal.

Though challenge has been made in the present appeal filed by

the appellant-N.F. Railway to the judgment and determination made by the

L.A. Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh in Misc (L.A) No.107 of 2014,

Mr. De, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-N.F. Railway fairly

submits that similar challenges had been made earlier by the N.F. Railway

in the same mouja which was disposed of by this Court in LA. App. No.96

of 2019 vide judgment dated 12.03.2021 wherein the acquired land was

directed to be determined @ Rs.18,00,000/-per kani and the said judgment

was borrowed by this Court in LA. App. No.25 of 2020 as well. However,

in the present case, it appears that the L.A. Judge has determined the value

@ Rs.14,00,000/- per kani and consequently learned counsel for the

appellant submits that since the present case is covered by the judgments

referred to hereinabove, nothing further remains for consideration.

Admittedly, in the present case, no cross objection has been

filed and pursuant to interim directions of this Court, certain amount has

come to be deposited by the N.F. Railways before the Registrar General of

this Court. Of course, there is some dispute between the parties vis-à-vis the

manner and computation of amount due to the private respondent. It is also a

fact that the private respondent has moved for execution of the award.

Consequently, the present appeal is dismissed.

Learned counsel for the appellant has no objection if the

amount deposited before the Registrar General of this Court along with

interest accrued thereon is released in favour of the private respondent and it

is so directed. Insofar as the modification is concerned, it is left open to the

Land Acquisition Collector in the execution case to determine the actual

amount that is due and to set off the amount which shall be released by the

Registrar General to the private respondent.

With the aforesaid observations, the appeal stands disposed of.

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

(INDRAJIT MAHANTY), CJ

Pijush