[Cites 2, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-2) vs Tazul Islam on 12 December, 2025
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
Page 1 of 4
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
LA APP NO.48 OF 2025
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-2),
N.F. Railway, Gurkhabasti, Agartala, West Tripura.
... APPELLANT-OPPOSITE PARTY.
VERSUS
1. Tazul Islam,
S/O Abdul Choban.
2. Jahenara Begam,
W/O Lt. Ichab Ali.
3. Marupa Begam,
daughterof Lt. Ichab Ali.
4. Majeda Begam,
Daughter of Lt.Ichab Ali.
5. Manoyara Begam,
Daughter of Lt.Ichab Ali.
6. Md. Hanif,
Son of Lt. Ichab Ali.
7. Billal Hossain,
Son of Ichab Ali
8. Kamal Hossain.
Son of Lt Ichab Ali.
9. Alyea Begam,
daughter of Lt.Abdul Choban.
10. Ayesha Khatun,
daughter of Lt. Abdul Choban.
11. Nurul Islam,
son of Lt Abdul Choban
12. Shirajul Islam,
son of Lt Abdul Choban.
Page 2 of 4
13. Peyara Begam,
Daughter of Lt.Abdul Choban,
14. Saykul Islam,
S/o Lt. Abdul Choban.
All are resident of Village-Raghunathpur, P.S-Bishalgarh, District-
Sepahijala.Pin-799102
...RESPONDENT-CLAIMANT(S)
15) Land Acquisition Collector, West Tripura, Agartala, (Now Sepahijala
District, Bishramganj.
.....RESPONDENT
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
Present:
For the Appellant(s) : Ms. B. Majumder, Deputy SGI.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Saha, Advocate.
12.12.2025
Order
1. This present appeal has been filed against the judgment and
award dated 15.05.2024 passed in Misc.(L.A.) 33 of 2018 by the learned
Land Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh.
2. The brief fact of this case is that, as per the requisition of
the appellant, the land of the respondent-claimants, hereinafter referred to as
the respondents, situated under Mouja-Bishalgarh, recorded in Khatian No.
998/1, 2 & 3, Plot Nos. 4472, 4475, 5114(p), 4426(p), 4427, 4458, 4459,
5344, 4428/12612 and 4683 under Sheet No. 5/p, land measuring 0.87 acres,
classified as Nal and Viti (Nal) land, was acquired by respondent No. 2, i.e.,
the Land Acquisition Collector, South Tripura, vide notification dated
28.06.2011 for construction of the "New Railway Line from Agartala to
Sabroom." Accordingly, the L.A. Collector, South Tripura, Sabroom,
awarded compensation @ Rs. 14,00,000/- per kani for 'Nal' class of land and
Rs. 25,00,000/- per kani for 'Viti' class of land.
3. Being aggrieved by the amount of compensation, the
respondentS filed an application under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, 1894,
seeking reference of the matter to the L.A. Judge, Sepahijala District,
Bishalgarh, for determination of proper compensation. Thereafter, the
learned L.A. Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh, after framing issues and
hearing both parties, by judgment dated 15.05.2024 allowed the claim
petition and enhanced the value of 'Nal' class land to Rs. 25,00,000/- per
kani and enhanced the value of 'Viti' class land to Rs. 30,00,000/- per kani.
4. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment
and award dated 15.05.2024 passed by the learned L.A. Judge, Sepahijala
District, Bishalgarh, in Misc.(L.A.) 33 of 2018, the appellant has preferred
the instant appeal seeking to set aside the impugned judgment and award
dated 15.05.2024.
5. It is seen from the record that, despite service of
notice, there is no representation on behalf of the unofficial respondents.
6. Heard Mr. B. Majumder, learned Deputy SGI,
appearing for the appellant, as well as Mr. S. Saha, learned counsel appearing
for the official respondent.
7. This matter pertains to payment of compensation.
This Court, in identical appeals under the Land Acquisition Act, has taken
the view that since the issue of ownership was not decided by framing any
separate issue for proving title and ownership, such matters were remanded
to the concerned L.A. Judge.
8. Accordingly, this matter also needs to be remanded
back to the trial Court, since the issue regarding title and ownership of the
claimants was not framed by the learned trial Court. Therefore, the order
dated 15.05.2024 passed by the lower Court is set aside, and the appeal is
remanded back to the trial Court for reconsideration of the matter by framing
an issue on the point of title deed and deciding the ownership, and thereafter
passing an award in accordance with law.
9. It is needless to observe that, in the event the land is
acquired belonging to the landlord, he would be entitled to fair and even
generous compensation in a given circumstance; but unless it is decided that
the recipient of the claim amount holds a valid, alienable title, it cannot be
said that he is entitled to claim compensation. An unauthorized person cannot
be paid even a single rupee from public money.
10. With the above observations and directions, the appeal
is remanded back and is accordingly disposed of. As a sequel, miscellaneous
application(s), if any, shall also stand closed.
DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD, J
Suhanjit
SABYASAC Digitally signed by
SABYASACHI GHOSH
HI GHOSH Date: 2025.12.19
15:15:18 +05'30'
