Shri Gautam Ghosh @ Radhu vs The State Of Tripura
2024 Latest Caselaw 676 Tri

Tripura High Court

Shri Gautam Ghosh @ Radhu vs The State Of Tripura on 2 May, 2024

Author: Arindam Lodh

Bench: Arindam Lodh

                      HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
                            AGARTALA
                            WA No.124 of 2023

   Shri Gautam Ghosh @ Radhu,
   Son of late Manmohan Ghosh, aged about 56 years,
   Resident of Thakurpalli Road, Krishnanagar,
   P.O:- Agartala-799001, Sub-Division- Agartala,
   P.S:- West Agartala, District- West Tripura.
                                                          ...........Appellant(s).

                                  Versus

1. The State of Tripura, represented by
   the Secretary, Department of Revenue,
   Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat,
   P.O:- Kunjaban-799010, Sub-Division:- Agartala,
   P.S:-New Capital Complex, District:- West Tripura.

2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue,
   Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat,
   P.O:-Kunjaban-799010, Sub-Division- Agartala,
   P.S:- New Capital Complex, District:- West Tripura.

3. The District Magistrate & Collector,
   West Tripura District.
                                                   ...............Respondent(s).

                                 Along With
                             WA No.143 of 2023

1. The State of Tripura, to be represented by
   Secretary, Department of Revenue,
   Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat,
   P.O:- Kunjaban-799010, Sub-Division:- Agartala,
   P.S:-New Capital Complex, District:- West Tripura.
2. The Principal Secretary, Department of Revenue,
   Government of Tripura, Civil Secretariat,
   P.O:-Kunjaban-799010, Sub Division Agartala,
   P.S:- New Capital Complex, District:- West Tripura.
3. The District Magistrate & Collector,
   West Tripura District, A.K. Road, PS: West Agartala,
   PO & Sub Division: Agartala, PIN:799001

4. The Sub Divisional Magistrate, Sadar,
   West Tripura District, Office Lane, PS: West Agartala,
   PO & Sub Division Agartala, PIN:799001
                                                      ............... Appellant(s
                                    Page 2 of 8



                                    Versus

   Sri Gautam Ghosh @ Radhu,
   S/O- Lt. Mohinimohan Ghosh, aged about 54 years,
   resident of Thakurpalli Road, Krishnanagar,
   PO Agartala 799001, Sub Division Agartala,
   PS: West Agartala, Dist: West Tripura.
                                                      ............Respondent(s)
             For Appellant(s)
             in W.A. No.124 of 2023 :      Mr. S. Lodh, Advocate.
                                    :      Ms. S. Chowdhury, Advocate.
                                    :      Mr. S. Majumder, Advocate.
             For Respondent(s)       :     Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.

             For Appellant(s)
             in W.A. No.143 of 2023 : Mr. M. Debbarma, Addl. G.A.
             For Respondent(s)         : Mr. S. Lodh, Advocate.
             Date of hearing
             & delivery of judgment : 02.05.2024
             Whether fit for reporting : No


                             _B_E_ F_O_R_E_
              HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARINDAM LODH
           HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA
                     JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)

We have heard Mr. M. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. appearing

for the appellants in case W.A. No.143 of 2023 and for the respondents in

W.A. No.124 of 2023. Also heard Mr. S. Lodh, learned counsel appearing for

the appellant in W.A. No. 124 of 2023 and for the respondent in W.A. No.143

of 2023.

[2] Both the appeals have been taken up together since common

questions of law and facts are involved.

[3] While deciding a dispute, Ld. Single Judge in Crl. Rev. P. No.49

of 2017 titled as Sri Goutam Ghosh @ Radhu vs. The State of Tripura had

passed the following directions:

"25. Having observed thus, the impugned order is set aside and quashed. But the parties are to observe the following directions till the dispute as latent in the controversy are determined or settled:

I) The Secretary, Revenue department shall independently make an inquiry so as to ascertain whether the property is an unclaimed property or not. If the property appears to him as unclaimed, he shall take all the legal steps for vesting the property in the state. If any testament or instrument or transfer appears to him grossly illegal or irregular, he shall within a period of six months from the day when he would receive a copy of this order, approach the court of the competent jurisdiction seeking the appropriate relief in respect of the said property.

II) The petitioner shall not create any third party interest nor shall he change the character of the suit land in any manner. The status of the suit land shall be maintained by him for the next six months as prescribed above.

It is needless to say that this order shall not truncate any right of the legal heirs of Narayan Debbarma, since deceased in whose name the property is recorded conforming to his title and as in this regard, no dispute has been projected as yet.

In the result, this petition stands allowed to the extent as stated above.

A copy of this order be served on the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Tripura for purpose of taking action in terms of the above direction."

[4] Thereafter, the competent authority of the Revenue Department,

Govt. of Tripura had passed an Order dated 27.07.2022 holding that the Will

executed by one Smt. Anjali Debbarma in favour of Gautam Ghosh was an

illegal transfer being executed in violation of Section 187 of TLR & LR Act,

1960 and the Will property was directed to be vested upon the Government

taking into consideration the law embodied in Section 29 of the Hindu

Succession Act, 1956. This Order dated 27.07.2022 had been challenged by

Sri Gautam Ghosh by filing a writ petition being registered as WP(C) No.197

of 2023 titled as Sri Gautam Ghosh @ Radhu vs. The State of Tripura & 3

Ors. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties, Ld. Single

Judge vide order dated 28.07.2023 had set aside the Order dated 27.07.2022

passed in W.P.(C) No.197 of 2023 and held that declaration of the Will

property as unclaimed by the Revenue Department was improper and not

legally tenable. It was further observed in the said Order dated 28.07.2023 that

"In so far as the claim of the petitioner for title over the said property is

concerned, this court is not deciding the same. If advised the petitioner may

approach competent court of Law seeking redressal." Sri Gautam Ghosh has

preferred the instant appeal challenging the said observation, as according to

the appellant, the said order suffers from ambiguity. On the other hand, the

State of Tripura also has preferred an appeal challenging the Order dated

28.07.2023 passed by the Ld. Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.197 of 2023.

[5] Background of the case, in short, is that one Lt. Anjali Debbarma

had executed a Will in favour of appellant Sri Gautam Ghosh though there

was no blood relation of Lt. Anjali Debbarma with Sri Gautam Ghosh. But,

out of love and affection and since Sri Gautam Ghosh had looked after her,

she executed the questioned Will in favour of Sri Gautam Ghosh. Out of some

complaints lodged by some of the villagers against the possession of the

appellant i.e. Sri Gautam Ghosh over the Will property left behind by Lt.

Anjali Debbarma, a proceeding was initiated under Section 145 and Section

146 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Order passed in said

proceeding was challenged by the appellant Sri Gautam Ghosh before this

Court in Crl. Rev. P. No.49 of 2017 which was quoted here-in-above. From

the judgment and order passed by the Ld. Single Judge quoted hereinabove, it

is clear that a direction was issued upon the respondents-State to approach the

competent Court within a period of six months, if the Revenue Department

finds any irregularities or illegalities in the execution of the purported Will on

receipt of the copy of the judgment and order. The Revenue Department,

Government of Tripura had preferred to keep silent for a considerable period

of time. However, after repeated approach by Sri Gautam Ghosh, the appellant

herein, the Principal Secretary, Revenue Department had passed an order

dated 27.07.2022 in Case No.12/Rev/P.Secy/2021 titled as Sri Goutam Ghosh

vs. the State of Tripura holding that the execution of the Will was made in

violation of the provisions of Section 187 of TLR & LR Act, 1960 and since it

was held that the Will was executed illegally, they declared the will property

as unclaimed property and directed vesting of the same upon the Government

of Tripura taking note of the provision laid down in Section 29 of the Hindu

Succession Act,1956. The said order dated 27.07.2022 was challenged by way

of filing a writ petition before this Court. While disposing of the W.P.(C)

No.197 of 2023, Ld. Single Judge did not decide the claim of Gautam Ghosh

on title over the will property and directed the petitioner to take appropriate

course of action before the competent Court of law, seeking redressal.

[6] The State of Tripura has challenged the said direction and

observation of the Ld. Single Judge in W.A. No.143 of 2023 on the ground

that Ld. Single Judge should not to have interfered with the Order dated

27.07.2022 passed by the Revenue Department, Government of Tripura.

[7] According to Mr. Debbarma, learned Addl. G.A. the Will

property has been vested to the Government by dint of the application of

Section 29 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 for the reason that the executrix

Lt. Anjali Debbarma was a member belonging to tribal community and since

the property belonged to a tribal woman it could not be transferred to Sri

Gautam Ghosh, being barred by Section 187 of the TLR & LR Act, 1960.

[8] On the other hand, Mr. Lodh, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the appellant Sri Gautam Ghosh, has submitted that the Revenue

Department has no authority to decide the legalities or illegalities of the Will

executed by Lt. Anjali Debbarma. There was a clear direction of the Court that

in case of any doubt of illegalities or irregularities the competent authority of

the State should approach the competent Court of law for seeking appropriate

declaration about the genuinity or propriety of the said execution of the Will.

[9] In the light of aforesaid submissions we have perused the

judgment and order passed by Ld. Single Judge in Crl. Rev. P.49 of 2017 and

the order passed by Ld. Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.197 of 2023.

[ 10 ] In Crl. Rev. P. No.49 of 2017, we find that the Ld. Single Judge

had directed the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government of Tripura to

make an independent inquiry so as to ascertain whether the property is an

unclaimed property. It was further directed that if any testament or instrument

or transfer appears to be grossly illegal or irregular, the Secretary, Revenue

Department, Government of Tripura would approach the Court of the

competent jurisdiction seeking appropriate relief in respect of the said

property within a period of six months from the day when he would receive a

copy of the judgment and order passed by the Court.

[ 11 ] In the instant case, it is apparent that Sri Gautam Ghosh has been

claiming his right, title and interest over the said property by dint of an

unregistered Will executed by said Lt. Anjali Debbarma. So, direction passed

by the Ld. Single Judge in Crl. Rev. P. No.49 of 2017 as recapitulated earlier

has grossly been violated by the Secretary, Revenue Department, Government

of Tripura because there is clear existence of the Will executed by Anjali

Debbarma. It is not disputed at all.

[ 12 ] In view of this, the Revenue Department cannot directly initiate

proceeding for vesting of the property declaring the same as an unclaimed

property. Before coming to that stage, the Secretary, Revenue Department,

Government of Tripura should have complied with the direction passed by the

Ld. Single Judge that he should approach the competent Court of law if he

finds that there is no existence of any testament or instrument. As we said

earlier, there is undisputedly existence of Will. As such, we do not find any

illegality in the order dated 28.07.2023 passed by the Ld. Single Judge in

W.P.(C) No.197 of 2023 whereby and whereunder Ld. Single Judge had set

aside the order dated 27.07.2022 declaring the Will property as an unclaimed

property and vesting of the same to the Government of Tripura. We also do

not find any ground to interfere with the direction of the Ld. Single Judge

upon the petitioner that if he so advised, the petitioner may approach the

competent Court of law seeking redressal. In our considered view, the learned

Single Judge while passing the said order intended to give liberty to the

petitioner to approach the competent Court of law, if his right to enjoy the

Will property is threatened by anyone in any manner whatsoever.

Accordingly, we clarify that the appellant-writ petitioner, Gautam Ghosh will

approach the competent Court of law of appropriate jurisdiction if his title and

possession is threatened or tried to be interfered with by any one in any

manner whatsoever. We also make it clear that the Secretary, Revenue

Department, Government of Tripura by now is barred by taking any action in

terms of the direction mentioned in point no.-I of para-25 of the judgment and

order dated 29.06.2018 passed by Ld. Single Judge in Crl. Rev. P. No. 49 of

2017 since 6(six) months have already been elapsed over to approach the

competent Court of law from the date he had received of the copy of the said

order.

With the aforesaid directions and clarifications, both the writ appeals are disposed of.

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

        (S. DATTA PURKAYASTHA, J)                          (ARINDAM LODH, J)




SATABDI               Digitally signed by SATABDI
                      DUTTA

DUTTA                 Date: 2024.05.07 18:01:56
                      +05'30'
Riki