Page 1 of 5
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
L.A. App. No. 53 of 2023
The General Manager (Project),
National Highways Infrastructure
Development Corporation Ltd, (NHIDCL)
Ministry of Road, Transport & Highways,
A Government of India Undertaking,
nd
PMU Office- Khowai, 2 Floor (C/o, Jahar Nag),
Ganki, Khowai, PS- Khowai,
District-Khowai, Tripura, Pin-799201.
Appellant(s)
……
Versus
1) Sri Sunil Chandra Roy,
Son of Late Jatindra Kumar Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS - East Agartala, PO - Renters Colony
District - West Tripura.
2) Sri Mahendra Kumar Roy,
Son of Nabin Chandra Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS - East Agartala, PO - Renters Colony
District - West Tripura.
3) Sri Bhupesh Chandra Roy
Son of Prakash Chandra Roy
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
District West Tripura.
–
4) Sri Pramod Chandra Roy,
Son of Dhwarika Mohan Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
District West Tripura.
–
5) Sri Kumud Ranjan Roy,
Son of Kshetra Mohan Roy
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
District West Tripura.
–
6) Sri Nirash Ranjan Roy,
Son of Jogendra Kumar Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
District West Tripura.
–
7) Sri Sachindra Roy,
Son of Prakash Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
Page 2 of 5
8) Sri Abani Roy
Son of Prakash Roy,
Resident of Rabindranagar,
PS East Agartala, PO Renters Colony
– –
District West Tripura.
–
aimant-respondent(s)
……….Cl
9) The Land Acquisition Collector,
West Tripura District, Agartala.
……Respondent(s)
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Mr. P. Majumder, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. A. Acharjee, Advocate.
Date of hearing
& judgment : 28.03.2024
Whether fit for reporting: No
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
MR. JUSTICE S. D. PURKAYASTHA
HON’BLE
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. P. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for
the appellant.
None is present for the claimant-respondent Nos.1 to 8.
Also heard Mr. A. Acharjee, learned counsel appearing
for the respondent No.9 (L.A. Collector).
[ 2 ] A land area of 0.029 acre of plot number 5423/p of
Khatian No.2143/3 of class viti(tilla) of Mouja- Dukli, Sheet No.2/P
was acquired by the Government of Tripura, Revenue Department
for construction of bypass road from Khayerpur to Amtali vide
Notification bearing NoF.9(7)-Rev/Acq/XIV/04 dated 12.02.2004.
The L.A. Collector after hearing the parties determined the
compensation in the below noted rate for valuation of the lands:
Page 3 of 5
Classes of land Valuation of land per Kani
Rs.2,50,000/-
‘Bastu(Tilla)’
Viti(Nal), Viti(Tilla), Viti, Tilla. Rs.2,25,000/-
Nal, Pukurpar (Nal), Pond(Nal), Rs.2,00,000/-
Doba(Nal),
Gopat and Path Rs.20,000/-
[ 3 ] Allowing those rates, the claimants were awarded
compensation for valuation of the land of Rs.2,25,000/- per kani.
Being aggrieved thereby the claimant Sri Sunil Chandra Roy
prayed for reference before the Ld. L.A. Judge, West Tripura,
Agartala. He claimed valuation of land @Rs.20,00,000/- per kani.
During hearing before Ld. L.A. Judge, said Sri Sunil Chandra Roy
examined himself and proved certified copy of sale deed bearing
No.1-977 of 2002 dated 02.02.2002(Exbt.1) where Viti(tilla) class
of land was sold for Rs.50,000/- i.e. @Rs.5,00,000/- per kani, but
no map was submitted to show the distance of land of said sale
exemplar from the acquired land. From the side of L.A. Collector,
one Narendra Chandra Deb was examined and he proved certified
copies of sale deed number 1-4503 dated 09.05.2000 (Exhibit-A),
sale deed bearing number 1-338 dated 09.01.2001 (Exhibit-B),
sale deed bearing number 1-216 dated 05.01.2001 (Exhibit-C),
sale deed bearing number 1-6559 dated 19.07.2002 (Exhibit-D)
and sale deed bearing number 1-538 dated 16.01.2003 (Exhibit-
E), but he also did not prove any map in this regard.
[ 4 ] Mr. Majumder, learned counsel referred a judgment of
this Court dated 14.03.2024 passed in L.A. App. No.52 of 2023
wherein compensation for land was determined @Rs.3,00,000/-
Page 4 of 5
per kani in respect of a Nal class of land which was also acquired
by same notification and for similar purpose. Mr. Majumder,
learned counsel, therefore, submits that similar rate may be
maintained in this present case. Mr. Acharjee, learned counsel also
made similar submission.
[ 5 ] As already indicated above that from the side of
claimant the sale exemplar under Exbt.1 was proved wherein the
transaction took place for transfer of said land @Rs.5,00,000/- per
kani, but Ld. L.A. Judge enhanced the compensation going beyond
that rate too by determining the land valuation @ Rs.10 lakh per
kani. Apart therefrom the claimants did not submit any map to
show that land of Exbt.1 was closure to acquired land. Regarding 5
numbers of sale exemplars as submitted from the side of the LA
Collector, 4 numbers of such exemplars are not relating to similar
class of land like the present acquired land. Only Exhibit-E relates
to Viti class of land which was transacted in the year 2003 @
Rs.1,58,000/- per kani and no map was also submitted by them to
show the distance of said land from the acquired land. But at the
same time, in L.A. App. No.30 of 2022 earlier this Court
determined compensation of such Viti(tilla) class of land
@Rs.3,00,000/- per kani in respect of same acquisition and
thereafter in L.A. App. No.42 of 2023 decided on 23.02.2024 with
L.A. App. No.48 of 2023, L.A. App. No.61 of 2023 and L.A. App.
No.62 of 2023, similar rate was maintained by this Court for Nal
and other classes of land too.
Page 5 of 5
[ 6 ] Considering all these aspects, valuation of the acquired
land is determined @Rs.3,00,000/- per kani. The impugned award
dated 19.03.2022 as passed by the Ld. L.A. Judge, West Tripura,
Agartala in Misc.(LA) 351 of 2016 is hereby interfered with. The
claimants will now get compensation @Rs.3,00,000/- per kani for
valuation of land alongwith other statutory benefits like solatium,
additional compensation, interest, and cost in terms of the award
passed by the Ld. L.A. Judge in said Misc.(LA) No.351 of 2016
dated 19.03.2022.
The appeal is accordingly allowed.
The pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed
of.
Reconsign the LCRs with copy of this judgment.
JUDGE
Digitally signed by SATABDI
SATABDI DUTTA
DUTTA
Date: 2024.04.03 10:46:12 +05'30'
Riki