The In-Charge vs Sri Shyam Lal Das
2023 Latest Caselaw 273 Tri

                                Page 1 of 6




                     HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                           AGARTALA

                          L.A. APP. No.26/2021

The In-Charge, H.R. & E.R., Oil & Natural Gas Corporation Limited, Tripura
Asset, Agartala, P.O. ONGC, P.S. Amtali, District-West Tripura, PIN-799014.
                                                          ...... Appellant(s)
                            VERSUS
1. Sri Shyam Lal Das, S/O. Sri Moti Lal Das,
2. Smt. Sabita Das, W/O. Shri Shyam Lal Das,
   Both of Konaban, P.S.-Madhupur, District-Sepahijala.
                                             ...... Claimant-Respondent(s)

3. The Land Acquisition Collector, Sipahijala, Office of the D.M. Collector, Bishramganj, Sipahijala, Government of Tripura, P.O. & P.S.-Bishramganj, District-Sipahijala, Pin-799103.

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

For Appellant(s) : Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Soumen Saha, Advocate.

For Respondent(s) : Mrs. Sujata Deb (Gupta), Advocate, Ms. Rumpa Dey, Advocate.

HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

Date of hearing and judgment : 31st March, 2023.

JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

Heard Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by

Mr. Soumen Saha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-ONGC. Also

heard Mrs. Sujata Deb (Gupta), learned counsel appearing for the

respondents No.1 and 2-claimants.

2. This appeal under section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894

(hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the award dated 07-12-

2019 passed by the learned Land Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala District,

Bishalgarh in case No. Misc.(L.A.) 52 of 2012 whereby he assessed the

value of the acquired land of the claimants at Rs.1,42,500/- per kani with all

other consequential benefits.

3. Appellant has prayed for the following reliefs:

"(a) Admit this appeal of the appellants and call for the records AND after hearing Pass judgment setting aside, quashing and/or reversing the impugned Judgment and award dated-07-12- 2019 passed by the Learned Land Acquisition Judge, Sipahijala, Bishalgarh in case No. Misc (L.A.) 52 of 2012;

(b) Grant costs and incidental to this appeal to the State appellants;

(c) Stay the Judgment and award dated 07-12-2019 passed in Misc. L.A. 52 of 2012 till disposal of the instant appeal;

(d) And after hearing the parties herein the Hon'ble Court would be pleased to setting aside, quashing and/or reversing the impugned Judgment and award dated 07-12- 2019 passed by the Learned Land Acquisition Judge, Sipahijala, Bishalgarh in case No. Misc. (L.A.) 52 of 2012;

(e) Grant such further or other relief or reliefs to which the appellants are entitled having regard to the facts and circumstances involved in the matter;

AND In the interim, be pleased to pass an order staying execution of the impugned Judgment and decree dated 07-12-2019 passed in Misc. (L.A.) 52 of 2012 till disposal of the appeal."

4. The undisputed facts are that the claimants namely Shyam Lal

Das and Smt. Sabita Das were the owners of land measuring 2.40 acres

under Mouja-Konaban of Bishalgarh Sub-Division which was acquired by

the L.A. Collector vide Notification No.F.9(23)-REV/ACQ/XIV/2008 dated

12.12.2008 for the purpose of construction of drill site and Waste Pit for the

location RODF under Bishalgarh Sub-Division and compensation of

Rs.5,040/-/- per kani was awarded for the acquired land and Rs.45,500/- for

the 500 nos. of rubber trees. Being dissatisfied, the claimants filed claim

statements being Misc. (L.A.) 52 of 2012 before the learned Land

Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh claiming compensation of

Rs.3,00,000/- per kani for the acquired land and Rs.1,540/- for each rubber

tree and the learned L.A. Judge after recording evidence and hearing

arguments was pleased to enhance the compensation from Rs.5,040/- per

kani to Rs.1,42,500/- per kani and Rs.1,500/- for each rubber tree vide award

dated 07.12.2019. Aggrieved thereby, the appellant-ONGC has preferred this

appeal for setting aside the impugned award passed by the learned L.A.

Judge. Hence, this case.

5. Mr. S.M. Chakraborty, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr.

Soumen Saha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant-ONGC, submits

before this Court that the acquisition was made temporarily under Section 35

of the L.A. Act for a period of 3(three) years by the L.A. Collector and

thereafter award was calculated and amount of compensation was paid.

Counsel also contends that the claimants on being aggrieved by the award

are required to file their claim before the L.A. Collector as per Section 35 of

the Act and the L.A. Collector then will refer the same before the L.A. Judge

for re-determination of the compensation, but in the instant case learned L.A.

Judge took the said reference under Section 18 of the L.A. Act which is

followed in case of permanent acquisition. Counsel further contends that as

per settled law when the acquisition is made under Section 35 of the L.A.

Act, Section 23 has got no manner of application and as such, no solatium or

other consequential benefits can be awarded which was given in the instant

reference. Accordingly, he prays for setting aside the impugned award dated

07-12-2019 passed by the learned Land Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala

District, Bishalgarh in case No. Misc.(L.A.) 52 of 2012.

6. On the other hand, Mrs. Sujata Deb (Gupta), learned counsel

appearing for the respondents No.1 and 2-claimants, submits that the

temporary acquisition of the land was made initially in the year 2008 for a

period of three years and since the land was not acquired permanently within

this period, the claimant preferred writ petition before the High Court for a

direction to the respondent-L.A. Collector either to acquire the land

permanently or release the land in favour of the claimants and the Hon'ble

High Court directed the respondents to acquire the land permanently and

subsequently, in the year 2015 the land was permanently acquired. Counsel

also contends that L.A. Collector only awarded Rs.5,040/-/- per kani for the

acquired land and Rs.45,500/- for the 500 nos. of rubber trees and thereafter,

on being challenged, the learned L.A. Judge awarded Rs.1,42,500/- per kani

for the acquired land and Rs.1,500/- for each rubber tree vide award dated

07.12.2019 which is just and proper and needs no interference. Accordingly,

she prays for dismissal of the present appeal.

7. Having heard the submissions of learned counsel for the parities

and also perused the documents on record, this Court is of the considered

view that lower Court order is ex facie erroneous on the point of

consideration of the case as a reference case under Section 18 of the L.A.

Act when the matter pertains to Section 35(3) of the L.A. Act. Accordingly,

without expressing any opinion with regard to fixation of the amount of

compensation, the award dated 07-12-2019 passed by the learned Land

Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh in case No. Misc.(L.A.)

52 of 2012 is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Court below to

decide the matter afresh under Section 35(3) of the Old Land Acquisition

Act of 1894 as expeditiously as possible. The evidence and the materials

available on record shall be considered at the time of deciding the case.

In view of the above, the appeal stands allowed and disposed of.

8. Send down the lower court records forthwith.

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

CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)

Pulak