Tripura High Court
The Deputy Chief Engineer ... vs Sri Gautam Ghosh And Another on 10 July, 2025
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
LA.App No. 18 of 2024
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction-1), N.F. Railway,
Gurkhabasti
...........Appellant(s).
Versus
Sri Gautam Ghosh and another
...................Respondents
For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Bidyut Majumder, Dy. SGI.
For the Respondent(s) : Mr. Anjan Kanti Pal, Advocate.
BEFORE
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
ORDER
10.07.2025
[1] This present appeal has been filed under Section 54 of
the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the judgment and order
dated 27.06.2022 passed in Misc (L.A.) 25 of 2015 by the learned
Land Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala Tripura, Bishalgarh.
[2] The case in brief is that, as per the requisition of the
appellant the land of the respondent-claimant, here-in-after
referred to as the respondents, situated under Mouja-Bishalgarh,
Sheet No.4/p, recorded in Khatian no.2777, C. S. Plot No.
2777/24298, land measuring 0.10 acres, classified as tilla class of
land was acquired by the respondent no.2 i.e. the Land Acquisition
Collector, West Tripura vide notification dated 27.07.2011 for
construction of New Railway line from Agartala to Sabroom.
Accordingly, the L.A. Collector, West Tripura, has awarded the
compensation @ Rs. 27,50,000/- per acre i.e. 11,00,000/- per
kani. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the court of learned
L.A. Judge, West Tripura, under Section 18 of the L.A. Act and
subsequently, the L. A. Judge by its judgment dated 27.06.2022
enhanced the amount of award @ Rs. 14,00,000/- per kani. Being
aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and award dated
27.06.2022 passed by the learned L.A. Judge, Sepahijala District,
Bishalgarh, Tripura in case no. Misc L.A. 25 of 2015, the appellant
has preferred the instant appeal seeking following reliefs:
"(i) Admit the instant appeal,
(ii) Issue notice upon the respondents to show cause as to why
the impugned judgment/award dated 27.06.2022 passed by the
learned L.A. Judge, Sepahijala District, Bishalgarh shall not be
set-aside;
(iii) Call for the records of case no.Misc. L.A. 25 of 2015 from the
court of the learned L.A. Judge, Sipahijala District, Bishalgarh.
AND
(iv) After hearing both the sides may kindly set aside the
impugned judgment and award dated 27.06.2022 passed by the
learned L.A. Judge, Sipahijala District, Bishalgarh................"
[3] Heard the submissions made at the Bar. It is brought
to the notice of this Court that no issues were framed on the
alienable right, title and interest of the claimant over the property
while granting compensation and in similarly situated appeals, this
Court remanded back such matters to the Court below giving
liberty to the both sides to file relevant documents more
particularly, claimants were asked to file title deeds of the
ownership documents without which, it cannot be said that a
person in possession claiming compensation is the real owner
having alienable rights. Thus, additional issues need to be framed
on alienable right, title and interest of the claimant(s) over the
property in question.
[4] In view of the above, this Court is of the view that the
present matter be remanded back by setting aside the impugned
order and award dated 27.06.2022 passed in Misc (L.A.) 25 of
2015 by the learned Land Acquisition Judge, Sepahijala Tripura,
Bishalgarh, and, accordingly, the same is ordered. The Court below
shall re-examine the matter by giving opportunity to both sides for
filing relevant documents and also frame additional issues on
alienable right, title and interest. The claimant(s) shall also
produce any such document claiming him/them to be the lawful
owner(s) of the land in question by placing title deed, if any. The
claimant(s) would also be at liberty to adduce any other relevant
documents supporting the claim. Once the documents are placed
on record, the Court shall expedite the matter.
[5] It is needless to observe that in the event, if the land
is acquired pertaining to the landlord, he is entitled for fair and
even a generous compensation in a given circumstance, but unless
it is decided that the recipient of the claim-amount is holding a
valid alienable title, it cannot be said that he is entitled for
claiming the compensation. An unauthorized person cannot be paid
a single rupee from the public money.
[6] With the above observations and directions, this
matter is remanded back and accordingly, the appeal is disposed
of. As a sequel, stay, if any, stands vacated. Pending
application(s), if any, also stands closed.
JUDGE
Sabyasachi G.
SABYASACHI GHOSH GHOSH
Date: 2025.07.14 16:31:28 +05'30'
