[Cites 4, Cited by 0]
Tripura High Court
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-2) vs Nani Gopal Mallik & Anr. ... on 23 March, 2026
Author: T. Amarnath Goud
Bench: T. Amarnath Goud
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
I.A. 1 of 2025
In L.A. APP 5 of 2026
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-2) ----Applicant(s)
Versus
Nani Gopal Mallik & anr. ----Respondent(s)
For Applicant(s) : Mr. B. Majumder, Dy. SGI
For Respondent(s) : Mr. SK Deb, Sr. Advocate
Mr. SS Datta, Advocate
BEFORE
HON'BLE JUSTICE DR. T. AMARNATH GOUD
Order
23/03/2026
This is an application filed under Section 74(1) of the RFCTLARR Act,
2013, read with Section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condoning the delay of 264
days in preferring the appeal against the judgment and award dated 16.12.2024
passed in LA Case No. 101 of 2018 by the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation &
Resettlement Authority, Tripura.
Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
On the point of condoning the delay, on 16.03.2026 this Court adjourned the
matter to hear the matter on applicability of Section 74(1) of RFCTLARR Act,
2013 or Section 5 of Limitation Act, and on perusal of the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal Nos.... of 2026 (arising out of
@SLP(C) No(s) 215-216 of 2023, dated 09.02.2026, which is relied upon by
learned Deputy SGI, the same is considered and accordingly Section 5 of the
Limitation Act prevails upon Section 74 of the Act, 2013.
Mr. Majumder, learned Deputy SGI, submits that the delay of 264 days is
well explained in para 2 of the application which is supported by way of
affidavit. For convenience, Para 2 of the application, is reproduced here-in-
below:
"That, the limitation for preferring the appeal is 60 days from the date of passing of the
judgment. Therefore, the instant appeal ought to have preferred on or before 14.02.2025, but
the applicant could not prefer the instant appeal within the period of limitation as because
after passing the judgment the Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Authority,
Tripura, applied the certified copy of the judgment on 05.05.2025 and obtained the same on
06.05.2025. And after receiving the copy of the judgment the matter has been sent to the
panel counsel of the department for providing legal opinion. Accordingly, the concerned panel
counsel by his legal opinion dated 09.05.2025 requested the department for preferring the
appeal against the judgment and award dated 16.12.2024. Thereafter, the matter was
referred to the Law Officer of the department, Maligaon. Guwahati. Accordingly Law Officer
of the N.F Railway, Guwahati by its letter dated 10.06.2025 advised to prefer an appeal
against the Judgment and award dated 16.12.2024. Thereafter, by its letter dated vide No.
W/207/CON/AGTL Sabroom/ Court Cases/2025/w-5 dated 19.09.2025 department has
requested the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for preferring appeal however, the
said letter has been handed over to the Ld. DSGI on 20.09.2025. But the Ld. DSGI could not
prepare the Memo of appeal as because he was busy for some other matters and thereafter
puja vacation started w.e.f 27th September, 2025 to 26.10.2025 and accordingly prepared the
Memo of Appeal, along with condonation petition on 10.10.2025 and on the same day
forwarded the same to the department for vetting. Thereafter the department after vetting
returned the same to the Ld. Deputy SGI Mr. Majumder on 06.11.205 for filing before this
Hon'ble Court. Accordingly, the same has been filed before the Hon'ble High Court. Therefore
the delay of 264 days may kindly be condoned. Therefore, there is sufficient cause for causing
delay of 264 days in preferring the instant appeal. Therefore the delay of 264 days in
preferring the appeal may kindly be condoned."
Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel appearing for the respondents, has
argued that the appellant have not justified the delay by giving satisfactory
explanation. Learned senior counsel has drawn attention of this court to his
objection filed wherein learned counsel has categorically pointed out the delay
which stood unexplained. In para 5 and 6 of the objection, learned senior
counsel has enumerated the reasons as to why the delay shall not be condoned.
For better reference, paras 5 and 6 are reproduced herein below:
"5. With regard to the statements made in paragraph 2 of the petition, it is admitted that the
period of limitation for preferring the appeal is 60 days and hence the appeal ought to have
been filed within 60 days from the date of Award dated 16th December, 2024. As such it is
rightly contended that the appeal ought to have been on or before 14.12.2025. It is on record
that the certified copy of the Judgment was applied for on 05.05.2025 which was obtained on
06.05.2025. As such it is evident that the prayer for certified copy of the Order was made
beyond the period of limitation. The averments as regards the date on which legal opinion of
the concerned learned Advocate is said to have been made on 09.05.2025 are all to be proved
by the petitioner. Nothing is discernible as to what happened between 09.05.2025 and
10.06.2025 i.e. the day on which the legal opinion of the learned counsel was given and the
Law Officer took a long time between 09.05.2025 and 10.06.2025 to render his advice to
prefer the appeal against the impugned Judgment dated 16.12.2024. The petitioner has not
given any explanation whatsoever as to what happened between 10.06.2025 to 19.09.2025 to
make the request to the learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for preferring appeal.
6. The statement that the puja vacation commenced from 27th September, 2025 to
26.10.2025 cannot be construed to debar the appellant to get Memo of Appeal prepared and
file. However even without waiving to the earlier contention as to the rigor to proviso to sub-
section (1) of Section 74 of the Act of 2013, it is stated that even by that time the appeal could
not be preferred. As regards the statements made that the memo of appeal was prepared on
10.10.2025, the alleged date on which the file was returned to the learned SGI, the
respondent herein disputes the same."
Mr. Deb, learned senior counsel has urged this court that since as per the
provisions envisaged in the Act, 2013, the appeal ought to have been filed
within a period of 60 days from the date of award, but the applicants exceeded
the said statutory period and without any satisfactory explanation and reason,
the delay caused therein cannot be condoned.
To this learned counsel for the applicant pleaded for an accommodation
since he has never anticipated that the condonation of delay application would
be meticulously pointed out and the same would be argued and to come
prepared with the dates of delay and events pointed out by learned senior
counsel.
Mr. Majumder, learned Dy. SGI prays to file a better affidavit within
2(two) weeks.
Considered the submission.
List the matter once the better affidavit is placed on record.
JUDGE
SAIKAT Digitally signed by
SAIKAT KAR
KAR Date: 2026.03.23
17:50:52 -04'00'
