The General Manager; (Project) vs Smt. Puspa Rani Debnath
2024 Latest Caselaw 1270 Tri

Tripura High Court

The General Manager; (Project) vs Smt. Puspa Rani Debnath on 26 July, 2024

                HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                      AGARTALA

                  LA APP No.57 of 2023


  The General Manager; (Project),
  National Highways Infrastructural Development
  Corporation Ltd.(NHIDCL),
  Ministry of Road Transport & Highways,
  Government of India,
  A Government of India Undertaking,
  PMU Office Khowai, P.S. Khowai,
  District: Khowai Tripura,
  PIN:799 201
                                          ----Appellant (s)
                           Versus
1. Smt. Puspa Rani Debnath,
   Wife of Late Ramesh Chandra Debnath,
   Resident of Rabindranagar, P.O. Rabindranagar,
   P.S. East Agartala, District: West Triura
2. Smt. Gita Rani Debnath,
   Daughter of Late Ramesh Chandra Debnath,
   Resident of Rabindranagar, P.O. Rabindranagar,
   P.S. East Agartala, District: West Tripura
3. Smt. Swaraswati Debnath,
   Daughter of Late Ramesh Chandra Debnath,
   Resident of Rabindranagar, P.O. Rabindranagar,
   P.S. East Agartala, District: West Tripura
4. Sri Nimai Debnath,
   Son of Late Ramesh Chandra Debnath,
   Resident of Rabindranagar, P.O. Rabindranagar,
   P.S. East Agartala, District: West Tripura

5. Sri Nantu Debnath,
   Son of Late Ramesh Chandra Debnath,
   Resident of Rabindranagar, P.O. Rabindranagar,
   P.S. East Agartala, District: West Tripura

                               ---- Claimant/Respondents (s)

6. The Land Acquisition Collector, West Tripura, Government of Tripura, Old Secretariat Building, P.O. Agartala, P.S. West Agartala, District: West Tripura,

---- Respondents (s)

For Appellant(s) : Mr. N. Majumder, Adv.

Ms. M. Sarkar, Adv.

For Respondent(s)        :       D. C. Saha, Adv.

Date of Hearing     :            24.07.2024
Date of delivery of
Judgment and Order :             26.07.2024
Whether fit for
Reporting           :            NO


           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BISWAJIT PALIT

                       Judgment & Order

Heard Mr. N. Majumder, Learned counsel along with

Ms. M. Sarkar, Learned counsel appearing for the appellant

OP No.1 and also heard Mr. D. C. Saha, Learned counsel

appearing for the LA Collector. None appeared on behalf of

the referring-claimants.

02. The appellant has preferred this appeal under

Section 54 of the L.A. Act challenging the judgment and

award dated 21.05.2022 delivered by Learned L.A. Judge,

West Tripura, Agartala in connection with Case

No.Misc.(L.A.)334 of 2016. By the said award Learned L.A.

Judge has determined the market value of the acquired land

@Rs.7,00,000/- per kani each in respect of nal, pond(nal)

and pukurpar(nal) classes of lands along with other

statutory benefits. The subject matter of the appeal is as

follows:

03. On the basis of objection raised by the referring-

claimants against the award made by the LA Collector, the

L.A. Collector under Section 18 of the LA Act referred the

subject matter of the referring-claimants before the LA

Judge for appropriate decision on the ground that following

description of land belonging to the referring-claimant was

acquired by the LA Collector West Tripura, Agartala vide

notification No.F.9(7)-REV/ACQ/XIV/04 dated 12.02.2004

under Section 4 of the LA Act and accordingly compensation

of the acquired land was determined @Rs.5,00,000/- per

acre i.e. Rs.2,00,000/- per kani and the total amount of

Rs.2,26,705/- was awarded to the referring-claimants by

the L.A. Collector. The description of the acquired land is as

follows:

District- West Tripura, Sub-Division- Sadar, Mouja- Dukli sheet no.2/p, Khatian no.2251/1,2 under plot no.5498, 5520, 5495/p, 5496 and 5494/p, Class-nal, pond(nal) and pukurpar(nal), area-0.315 acre.

04. Before the L.A. Judge the referring-claimants

filed their claim statement sought for enhancement of the

award on the ground that the acquired land is most valuable

land and it has unique features in regard to its position or

potentialities and the area is a developed area. Moreover,

most of the awardees have their homestead within the

acquired land. Further the acquired land having its highest

potentialities both for commercial and industrial purposes.

In addition to that the acquired land has all types of modern

amenities like water connection, electricity connection,

telephone facility, bank, hospital, police station, high

schools, bus stand, auto stand, jeep stand, railway station,

university etc. It was further submitted that the acquired

land is situated very near to the Agartala town and

considering all the aspects the market value of the adjacent

land has been increasing day by day and it was further

submitted that the market value of the acquired land was

Rs.20,00,000/- per kani, on the relevant point of time. But

the L.A. Collector ignoring all these aspects determined the

market value of the acquired land @ Rs.2,00,000/- per kani.

In the said proceeding the OP No.1 i.e. the present

appellant appeared and filed the written statement denying

the assertions of the referring-claimants but they admitted

that the land of the referring-claimants was acquired by the

L.A. Collector by the said notification dated 12.02.2004 and

it was further submitted that the market value assessed by

the L.A. Collector was proper and justified. So the said OP

prayed for dismissal of the claim statement. The L.A.

Collector contested the said case before the LA Judge by

filing written counter-statement and submitted that after

due consideration of the relevant documents the L.A.

Collector determined the market value which was proper

and justified and prayed for dismissal of the claim petition.

05. Learned L.A. Judge upon the pleading of the

parties framed following issues:

(1) Is the award given by the L.A. Collector, West Tripura inadequate? If so, what should be the just amount of compensation and who is/are to pay the same? (2) To what other reliefs are the parties entitled?

06. To substantiate the issues one Nimai Debnath on

behalf of the referring-claimants filed his examination-in-

chief in affidavit as PW-1 and he exhibited certified copy and

registered sale-deed bearing No.1-977, Book No.1, Vol

No.II, Page No.253-254 of 2002 (Exbt.1). On the other

hand from the side of the L.A. Collector one Narendra

Chandra Deb filed his examination-in-chief by way of

affidavit and on conclusion of argument Learned L.A. Judge

determined the value of the acquired land @Rs.7,00,000/-

per kani for nal, pond(nal) and pukurpar(nal) classes of land

along with other statutory benefits and further awarded

Rs.1000/- as cost under Section 27 of the LA Act.

Challenging that judgment the appellant OP No.1 preferred

this appeal under Section 54 of the LA Act before the High

Court.

07. In course of hearing of arguments Learned

counsel Mr. N. Majumer appearing for the appellant drawn

the attention of the court that in similar other cases of the

same notification this High court awarded compensation @

Rs.3,00,000/- per kani in place of Rs.7,00,000/- per kani.

He also placed on record the orders passed by this High

Court in connection with Case No. LA APP. No.21 of 2023,

LA APP No.24 of 2023, LA APP No.42 of 2023, LA APP No.48

of 2023, LA APP No.61 of 2023 and LA APP No.62 of 2023

and also LA APP No.1 of 2023. Referring the same Learned

counsel submitted that since the subject matter of this

appeal is covered by the aforesaid judgments of this High

court. So this appeal may be allowed and the compensation

may be reduced to Rs.3,00,000/- per kani from

Rs.7,00,000/- per kani as awarded by the Tribunal below.

Learned counsel Mr. D. C. Saha also shared the

same view.

None appeared on behalf of the referring-claimants to

counter the appeal filed by the present appellant.

08. Heard the submission of Learned counsel. On

bare perusal of the order in connection with Case No.LA APP

No.21 of 2023 it appears that under the same notification

this High court has awarded compensation for the acquired

land @Rs.3,00,000/- per kani and also in connection with LA

APP No.42 of 2023, LA APP No.48 of 2023, LA APP No.61 of

2023 and LA APP No.62 of 2023 under the same notification

this High Court also awarded compensation @ Rs.3,00,000/-

per kani for the acquired land to the respective claimants.

Further in the case of LA APP No.1 of 2023 and LA APP

No.24 of 2023 this High court under the same notification

also awarded compensation for the acquired land

@Rs.3,00,000/- per kani. Since the present appeal is

squarely covered by the said judgment/orders of this High

Court so this court is of the considered opinion that an

amount of Rs.3,00,000/- per kani would be appropriate and

proper and be paid to the claimants and accordingly the

market value of the acquired land is determined in respect

of different classes of land @Rs.3,00,000/- per kani.

09. In view of the above, the present appeal is partly

allowed. The judgment and award of the Learned Tribunal

below in connection with Case No. Misc.(L.A.) 334 of 2016

dated 21.05.2022 passed by Learned L.A. Judge, Court

No.1, West Tripura, Agartala is modified to the extent that

the referring claimants would get compensation @

Rs.3,00,000/- per kani instead of Rs.7,00,000/- per kani

awarded by the Tribunal for all classes of acquired land

along with other statutory benefits awarded by the Learned

court below along with further cost of Rs.1,000/- awarded

under Section 27 of the LA Act by the Learned L.A. Judge.

With this observation and direction the appeal is

disposed on contest.

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

                                                         JUDGE




MOUMITA                     Digitally signed by
                            MOUMITA DATTA

DATTA
Moumita
                            Date: 2024.07.31
                            11:39:49 +05'30'