Tripura High Court
The General Manager Project vs Sri Jagadish Chandra Lodh on 18 October, 2023
Page 1 of 3
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
LA APP NO.98 OF 2023
The General Manager Project
......... Appellant(s)
Vs.
Sri Jagadish Chandra Lodh
......... Respondent(s)
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Samrat Ghosh, Advocate.
For the Respondent(s) : None.
Date of hearing and delivery of
Judgment & Order : 18.10.2023.
Whether fit for reporting : NO.
HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD
JUDGMENT AND ORDER(ORAL)
This present appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the
Land Acquisition Act, challenging the legality, propriety, and validity of
the Judgment and Award dated 22.11.2022 passed by the learned L.A.
Judge, West Tripura, Agartala in Case No.Misc. L.A.77 of 2017.
2. The brief fact of this case is that vide notification
No.F.9(7)-REV/ACQ/XIV/2004 dated 16.03.2004, three pieces of land of
the respondent-claimant was acquired by the L.A. Collector, West
Tripura, Agartala. The said land of the respondent-claimant is situated
under the Mouja Dukli under Sheet No.02/p, under West Tripura District
having Khatian No.1230/1, Plot Nos.5510/p, 5511/p and 5467/p and are
classified as Bastu(Nal), Pukurpar(Nal) and Nal respectively and all these
land measured upto 0.54 acres collectively.
3. At the time of the acquisition, L.A. Collector, assessed the
value of the land at Rs.6,25,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/- per acre with
statutory benefits.
4. The respondent-claimant accepted the compensation but
being unsatisfied with such award, filed objection and made and
reference under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, 1894 before the L.A.
Collector West Tripura, Agartala. However, L.A. Collector further referred
the case to the Court of learned Judge, West Tripura, Agartala for proper
adjudication.
5. The appellant herein contested the claim by filing a
counter-statement before the learned Court of L.A. Judge, stating inter
alia that the claimant respondent has been paid appropriate
compensation as per the market value of the land and considering the
relevant documents along with mandatory provisions of the L.A. Act,
1894. The L.A. Collector, West Tripura has also submitted its counter
statement in similar terms.
6. After hearing both the parties, vide its impugned
Judgment & Award dated 22.11.2022, the learned L.A. Judge, enhanced
the rate of compensation to Rs.10,00,000/- per kani for the acquired
land along with statutory benefits.
7. Heard Mr. S. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing appellant.
Despite several opportunities given, there is no representation on behalf
of the respondents
8. Mr. S. Ghosh, learned counsel appearing for the appellant
submits that in the present case, the land in question which was
acquired by the appellant from the respondent-claimant is non-
commercial areas and cannot be compensated with such higher rates.
The fact of the present case is squarely covered by the Judgment and
Order passed by this Court in LA App No.30 of 2022 dated 10.05.2023.
This Court in L.A. App No.30 of 2022 reduced the amount of
compensation of Rs.8,00,000/- per kani granted by the L.A. Court to
Rs.3,00,000/- per kani.
9. Accordingly, in view of the above submission, this present
appeal filed by the appellant-The General Manager (Project) National
Highway Infrastructural Development Corporation Ltd., is allowed to the
extent indicated above in terms of the Judgment and Order dated
10.05.2023 passed in L.A. App No.30 of 2022.
10. Registry is directed to enclose the copy of the Judgment
and Order dated 10.05.2023 passed in L.A App No.30 of 2022 along with
this instant appeal.
11. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated. Pending
application(s), if any also stands closed.
JUDGE
suhanjit
RAJKUMAR Digitally
RAJKUMAR
signed by
SUHANJIT SUHANJIT SINGHA
Date: 2023.10.19
SINGHA 12:39:26 +05'30'
