Smt. Rakhi Debbarma vs The Deputy Chief Engineer(Con)
2023 Latest Caselaw 137 Tri

                                Page 1 of 5


                        HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                             AGARTALA
                        LA APP NO.35 OF 2021

   Smt. Rakhi Debbarma,
   W/o- Sri Sachindra Debbarma,
   Vill- Pathaliaghat, P.S. Bishalramganj,
   Dist- Sepahijala, Tripura.
                                              ......... Appellant(s)
                      Vs.

   1. The Deputy Chief Engineer(Con),
   North Fortier Railway, Gurkhabasti,
   P.O- Kunjaban, P.S. - West Agartala,
   Dist- West Tripura, PIN-799 006.

   2. The Land Acquisition Collector,
   Bisharamganja, Dist- Sepahijala,
   Tripura.

                                 ....... O.P.Respondent(s)

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.K. Pal, Advocate.

Mr. S. Datta, Advocate.

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

Date of hearing and delivery of Judgment & Order : 07.02.2023.

Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE(ACTING) JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)

The case of the claimant-appellant in this instant

appeal is that learned L.A. Collector, Sepahijala District

Bishramganj had issued a notification under Section 4 of the

L.A. Act, 1894 vide No.F.9(4)-REV/ACQ/VII/09 dated

23.06.2009 followed by a declaration under the same number

for the acquisition of huge quantum of land including the plot

of land of the appellant herein measuring 3.00 acres of Tilla

class recorded in Khatian No.2522 Plot No.92/P for the

respondent No.1, the N.F. Railway for extension of N.F. Railway

track. The L.A. Collector awarded Rs.50,000/- per acre i.e.

Rs.20,000/- per kani whereon there were 600(six hundred)

numbers of growing 'Rubber Plants' which were at the latex

producing stage. The L.A. Collector awarded compensation

against the loss of rubber trees at only Rs.140/- against each

of the 600 plants. Due to this, the claimant-appellant has

suffered huge financial loss and livelihood.

2. Being aggrieved, the claimant-appellant preferred

a proceeding before the learned L.A. Judge, Sonamura,

Sepahijala Tripura bearing case No.Misc.(LA)31 of 2015. Vide

judgment and award dated 07.04.2018, the learned L.A. Judge

enhanced the compensation awarded by the L.A. Collector for

the acquired land of the appellant @ Rs.50,000/- per kani for

land measuring 3.00 acres of tilla class under Khatian No.2522

Plot No.92/P and also awarded Rs. 1.20.000/- as the

compensation for the destruction of rubber plants enhancing

from Rs.140/- to Rs.200/- for 600 numbers of rubber plants

and other consequential benefits.

3. Aggrieved thereby, this instant appeal is filed by

the claimant-appellant under Section 54, Sub-Section(2) of the

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 read with Section 96 of the Code of

Civil Procedure, 1908 for partial modification of the Judgment &

Award dated 07.04.2018 passed by the learned L.A. Judge,

Sonamura, West Tripura Judicial District, Sepahijala, Tripura in

Misc.(L.A.)31 of 2015.

4. Heard Mr. P.K. Pal, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant as well as Mr. A. De, learned counsel appearing

for the respondent No.1.

5. Mr. P.K. Pal, learned counsel appearing for the

appellant submits that learned L.A Judge failed to assess the

value against the loss of rubber plantations. The rubber plants

were under strict vigil for nourishment and would have grown

up to produce a substantial amount of Latex. The claimant-

appellant invested substantial funds in rearing those 600

rubber plants. Those plants would have given expected

earnings to maintain the livelihood of the family. To

substantiate his argument, learned counsel produced a

similarly situated award dated 09.07.2019, wherein, learned

L.A. Judge, Sonamura in a case bearing No.Misc.(LA)59 of

2014 titled as Sri Jotilal Debbarma vs The Deputy Chief

Engineer(Con) and anr., enhanced the compensation against

loss and damage of 116 number of rubber trees @ Rs.3,200/-

per tree over the award of Rs.163/- per tree awarded by the

L.A. Collector.

6. On the other side, Mr. A. De, learned counsel

appearing for respondent No.1, submits that the rubber trees

were 6(six) years old instead of 10(ten) years old as in the

case of the above-cited award. So, in terms of the award, as

noted in Jotilal(supra), the compensation against the loss and

damage of rubber trees may be enhanced to Rs.3000/- per

tree.

7. Heard both sides.

8. In terms of the arguments as advanced by both

sides and after perusing the evidence on record, this Court only

enhances the award in respect of the rubber trees. The amount

of compensation is enhanced from Rs.200/- per tree to

Rs.3,200/- per tree. Other awards as passed by the learned

L.A. Judge shall remain undisturbed. Accordingly, the appeal is

partly allowed to the extent indicated herein. The difference

amount along with interest which has already been decided by

the Court below shall be paid within a period of 3(three)

months from the date of the receipt of the copy of this order.

For the enhanced amount, the interest shall be computed from

the date of filing of the present appeal before this Court.

9. With the above observation and direction, this

instant appeal is partly allowed. Consequently, pending

application(s), if any also stand closed.

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

suhanjit