The Deputy Chief Engineer ... vs Smt. Gita Rani Debnath And Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 489 Tri

                                 Page 1 of 3




                      HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                            AGARTALA
                        LA. App. No.25 of 2020

The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), N.F. Railway, Agartala.
                                                        ----Appellant(s)
                                   Versus
Smt. Gita Rani Debnath and others.
                                                           -----Respondent(s)

For Appellant(s)                : Mr. A. De, Advocate.
For Respondent(s)               : Mr. Ranjit Debnath, Advocate,
                                  Mr. P. Gautam, Advocate.

                              Along with
                          CO(FA) No.01 of 2021

Smt. Gita Rani Debnath and others.
                                                         ----Appellant(s)
                                      Versus

The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), N.F. Railway and another.

-----Respondent(s) For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ranjit Debnath, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. De, Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. INDRAJIT MAHANTY

Order 06/05/2022

Heard learned counsels for the respective parties.

While the LA App. 25 of 2020 has been filed by the N.F.

Railway challenging the valuation of land acquired from the private

respondents, the private respondents on the other hand have filed the cross

objection registered as CO(FA) No.01 of 2021 challenging the valuation of

the rubber trees said to have been located on his land. In course of hearing, a

judgment of this Court in the case of Sri Subrata Mahalanabish versus the

Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-1), NF Railway and another passed by

Hon'ble Single Judge of this Court dated 12.03.2021 was brought on record.

It is fairly submitted by Sri De, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the

N.F. Railway that the award referred hereinabove in case of Sri Subrata

Mahalanabish (supra) has been satisfied and no challenge remains pending.

Consequently, this Court is of the considered view that since

the land acquired from the private respondents is in the same Mouja as in

the case referred hereinabove, the determination made by the Hon'ble

Single Judge in the said case shall also apply to the present case.

Insofar as cross objection is concerned, Sri De, learned counsel

for the N.F. Railway vehemently submits that the LA Judge has awarded a

sum of Rs.5000/- per rubber tree which is the highest amount paid in course

of all the acquisitions.

In conciliation of the aforesaid matter insofar as determination

of value of land is concerned, the judgment of this Court in case of Sri

Subrata Mahalanabish (supra) shall govern and the cross objection filed by

the private respondents for enhancement of the value of the rubber trees is

hereby rejected.

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the N.F. Railway as well as

the cross objection stands disposed of. The parties are at liberty to seek

execution of the decree as modified by the judgment of this Court.

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

(INDRAJIT MAHANTY), CJ

Pijush