Tripura High Court
The Deputy Chief Engineer ... vs Sri Nepal Chandra on 16 November, 2022
Author: S.G. Chattopadhyay
Bench: S. G. Chattopadhyay
Page - 1 of 7
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
LA.App No. 14/2021
The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction),
N.F.Railway, Badharghat Railway Complex,
P.O.- Siddhi Ashram, P.S.- Amtali, Agartala,
Tripura West.
------Appellant(s)
1. Sri Biswamani Debbarma,
Son of Behari Lal Debbarma.
2. Sri Krishna Debbarma,
Son of Behari Lal Debbarma.
3. Sri Mangal Debbarma,
Son of Behari Lal Debbarma.
4. Smt. Mukti Debbarma,
W/O Suresh Debbarma,
All are resident of Vill- Bankim Nagar, P.O. Birendra
Nagar, P.S. Jirania, District- West Tripura, Pin-799045.
5. The Land Acquisition Collector,
West Tripura, Agartala
----- Respondent(s)
BEFORE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. G. CHATTOPADHYAY
For Appellant(s) : Mr. Asutosh De, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Subhas Bhattacharjee, Advocate.
Date of hearing and
Judgment & Order : 16th Nov, 2022.
Whether fit for reporting : No.
[
JUDGMENT AND ORDER(Oral)
(S.G. Chattopadhyay, J)
This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894
against the judgment and award dated 26.2.2020 passed by the LA Judge
Page - 2 of 7
(Court No.1), West Tripura, Agartala, in case no. Misc. (LA) 151 of 2014
awarding compensation to the respondents (claimants before the learned LA
Judge) @ Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lacs) per kani of their acquired land in a
proceeding under Section 18 of the LA Act.
[2] Heard Mr. Asutosh De, learned counsel appearing for the
appellant as well as Mr. Subhas Bhattacharjee learned counsel appearing for
the respondents.
[3] The land in question was acquired by the LA Collector West
Tripura, by a notification dated 11.6.1999 for the purpose of construction of
new railway line from Kumarghat to Agartala. It is stated that the land of the
claimant-respondents is situated in plot no. 8089/p under Khatian No.2022 in
Bankimnagar mouja under Sadar Sub-division. The said land is classified as nal
land and the area of land acquired from the said claimant-respondents is 0.45
acre. The LA Collector assessed compensation at Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty
thousand), per kani for such acquisition and an amount of Rs.74,514/-(Rupees
seventy four thousand five hundred and fourteen) was paid to the claimant-
respondents including all other statutory benefits. Aggrieved by the said
assessment and award made by the LA Collector, the claimant-respondents
raised objection before the LA Collector and the LA Collector at the instance of
the said objections made a reference under Section 18 of the LA Act for
determination by the learned LA Judge.
[4] The claimant-respondents pleaded before the learned LA Judge
that the acquired land was located in a highly advantageous position having
Page - 3 of 7
greater degree of potentiality and as such the land could fetch higher market
price than that of the value determined by the LA Collector. They claimed
Rs.15,00,000/-(Rupees fifteen lacs ), per kani as compensation for acquisition
of their land along with other statutory benefits.
[5] On the other hand, the appellant pleaded before the learned LA
Judge that assessment made by the LA Collector was absolutely reasonable
because the LA Collector had taken into consideration all settled parameters for
determination of compensation.
[6] On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned LA Judge
framed the following issues:
i. Whether the reference made by the LA Collector under
Section 18 of the LA Act was maintainable?
ii. Whether assessment of compensation made by LA
Collector was appropriate?
iii. Whether the claimants were entitled to enhancement of
compensation for the acquisition of their land?
iv. What other relief/reliefs the parties were entitled to?
[7] Having heard the counsel representing the parties, the learned LA
Judge enhanced the compensation to Rs.5,00,000/-(Rupees five lacs), per kani
and accordingly awarded compensation along with other statutory benefits to
the claimant-respondents viewing as under :-
"Discussions and Findings
6) Issue No.1 :- The reference was made by Learned L.A. Collector under
Section 18 of the L.A. Act on the application of claimant Mangal Debbarma
alias Mangal Chandra Debbarma being dissatisfied. None of the opposite
parties have challenged the maintainability of the proceeding and there is
Page - 4 of 7
nothing in the record to hold that the proceeding is not maintainable.
IssueNo.1 is accordingly decided in favour of the claimant.
7) Issue Nos.2, 3 and 4 :- All the three issues are taken up together for
convenience of discussion and decision. Though in the counter statement the
L.A. Collector relied upon two sale deeds to support their assessment but did
not prove any such deed during trial. From the side of claimants only one deed
was produced and there is no alternative for this Tribunal except to rely upon
said deed to determine the value of the land subject to necessary deduction if
any. As per said deed no.1-351 dated 18.01.1994, plot no. 9322 of area 3
gandas of chara class was sold at Rs.75,000/- i.e. @ Rs.5,00,000/- per kani.
Said chara class was of abit inferior quality than nal class of land. However, as
per boundary description of said land there was one road on its southern side
but no map was submitted by claimants to show that the acquired land was a
road side land and that it was closure to the land under Exbt.2 to2(iii). Thus,
normal presumption will be that the acquired land was not a roadside land and
was situated at a considerable distance from the land of Exbt.2.Considering
that aspect some deduction is required to be made from the value of land
under Exbt.2 to 2(iii). However, it is also fact that the acquired land was of abit
higher quality and the acquisition was made in the year 1999 i.e. after five
years of execution of Exbt.2 to 2(iii), so, meanwhile value of the land in that
area has been escalated during that period of five years. Considering all these
aspects, to make a balance, no deduction is being made from the value of the
deed under Exbt.2 to 2(iii). Thus, the value of the acquired land is assessed at
Rs.5,00,000/- per kani. They will get other statutory benefits with the
enhanced rate of compensation. All the issues are according decided in favour
of the claimants.
ORDER
Now, therefore, the reference is allowed. The claimants are entitled to get compensation @ Rs.5,00,000/- (rupees five lakhs) per kani only in equal share for the acquired in equal share. The claimants will also get 30% Solatium, and 12% further enhanced amount of compensation upon the said enhanced land value computing from the date of notification under section 4 of L.A. Act, 1894 up to the date of award by Collector or the date of taking possession of land whichever is earlier, as per section 23(2) and section 23(1-A) of the Act respectively .The claimants will further get interest @ 9% per annum from the date of taking over possession for one year and thereafter @ 15% per annum after expiry of said one year till payment upon said excess amount of compensation as per section 28 of the Act. As per law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mehrawal Khewaji Trust, Faridkot & ors. V.State of Punjab & ors.,2012 AIR SCW 2822, the interest will also be counted on additional amount as awarded under section 23(1A) above and upon the solatium awarded under section 23(2) of the Act.
The claimants will also get Rs.1000/- as cost under section27 of the Act. The Opp. Party no.2 is also made jointly and severally liable to make the payment along with Opp. Party no.1."
.
Page - 5 of 7 [8] Having been aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said award, NF Railway (respondent before the learned LA Judge), being appellant has filed the present appeal mainly on the following grounds.
i. The learned LA Judge awarded an exorbitant compensation without taking into consideration the parameters laid down in this regard.
ii. The learned LA Judge did not appreciate the evidence adduced by the parties and delivered a judgment without assigning any reason.
iii. The learned LA Judge did not consider the market value of the neighboring lands and the nature and potentiality of the land while determining the compensation payable to the claimants.
[9] In the course of hearing of this appeal, learned counsel of the appellant has relied on the following orders passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court.
i. Order dated 03.03.2022 passed in LA Appeal No. 58 of 2021. ii. Order dated 24.03.2022 passed in LA Appeal No.1 of 2020. iii. Order dated 20.05.2022 passed in LA Appeal No. 24 of 2020. iv. Order dated 04.11.2022 passed in LA Appeal No.14 of 2022.
[10] The claimant respondents are in agreement with the appellant that the facts and issues involved in this appeal are squarely covered by the orders aforesaid passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court wherein award of the learned LA Judge @ Rs. 5,00,000/-( Rupees five lacs ), per kani for similar land was upheld and appeal against the award of the learned LA Judge was dismissed by the learned Single Judge.
Page - 6 of 7 [11] For reference, the extract of the order dated 04.11.2022 passed in LA appeal 14 of 2022 is reproduced here under:
"Learned counsel for the parties are in agreement that the facts and issues involved in this appeal are squarely covered by an order passed by Single Judge of this Court on 09.02.2022 in L.A. App.No.15/2021, titled as The Deputy Chief Engineer (Construction), N.F. Railway versus Sri Nepal Chandra Chakraborty and others referred to in L.A. App. No.58/2021. In the said order the learned Single Judge had observed as under:
"9. Considering the aforesaid circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant in the present facts and circumstances of this case would have no application to the present case and this Court finds that the learned L.A. Judge has proceeded lawfully and rationally in determining the value of the acquired land atRs.5,00,000 per kani. Therefore, this Court finds no basis or ground to interfere with the said order and accordingly, the appeal stands dismissed."
In view of such observation, this Court finds that no separate order, therefore, is required to be passed in this appeal and as such, the appeal stands dismissed in view of the above terms.
Accordingly, the amount deposited by N.F. Railway appellant in the Registry of this Court along with interest accrued thereon be released in favour of the respondent after proper identification, and if any further amount remains due, the claimant is at liberty to seek appropriate application before the Executing Court......."
[12] Since, the parties are in agreement that the present case is squarely covered under the decisions aforesaid, this court find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and award passed by the learned LA Judge.
[13] In terms of the above, the appeal stands dismissed. The appellant, NF railway is directed to deposit the whole amount of compensation in terms of the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned LA Judge with the Registry of this Court within a period of 06 (six) weeks from today.
Page - 7 of 7 [14] The Registry shall, thereafter, release the said amount in favour of the claimant-respondents on sufficient proof of identity in terms of apportionment made by the learned LA Judge.
In terms of the above the appeal stands disposed of.
Return the LCR with a copy of this order.
(S.G.CHATTOPADHYAY), J Paritosh