Back
2018 Supreme(Tri) 219
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA, AGARTALA
S. Talapatra, J.
Smti. Bakul Bala Som, wife of Sri Alok Som – Appellant
Versus
Comdt.,34, BN BSF – Respondent
L.A. APP. 01 of 2016
Decided On : 01-08-2018
For the Appellant : Mr. R. Saha, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. H. Deb, Asstt. S.G.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that objections under the Land Acquisition Act must be raised by the person whose land has been acquired, and the provisions of Section 31 and Section 28A govern the tendering of compensation and the process for enhancing the award.
Headnote:
Land Acquisition Act - Appeal under Section 54 - Summary of Acts and Sections: Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Section 54, Section 31, Section 18, Section 28A - The court discussed the provisions of Section 18, Section 31, and Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act, emphasizing the requirements for raising objections, tendering payment of compensation, and making applications for enhancing the award. The interpretation of these provisions influenced the court's decision regarding the denial of enhanced compensation to the appellant.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, Bakul Bala Som, filed an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, seeking enhanced compensation for the land acquired jointly with her husband. The Land Acquisition Judge had denied her claim for enhanced compensation, stating that only her husband had raised the objection against the awarded compensation.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's husband had raised the objection and benefited from it, but the same did not happen for the appellant. The court scrutinized the records and noted that only the husband had raised the objection for enhanced compensation, leading to the denial of the appellant's claim.
Issues: The issues revolved around the denial of enhanced compensation to the appellant, the requirements for raising objections under the Land Acquisition Act, and the eligibility for claiming enhanced compensation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, objections must be raised by the person whose land has been acquired, and the appellant failed to meet this requirement. The court also emphasized the provisions of Section 31 and Section 28A in relation to tendering payment of compensation and making applications for enhancing the award.
Final Decision: The appeal was disposed of, and the court directed the appellant to make an application under Section 28A of the Land Acquisition Act for enhancing the award, with the limitation for filing the application starting from the date of the judgment.
Heard Mr. R. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant as well as Mr. H. Deb, learned Asstt. S.G. appearing for the respondents.
2. This is an appeal under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 from the judgment dated 13.12.2013 delivered in L.A.(Ref)120 of 2013. The said reference was disposed of by the said judgment dated 13.12.2013 along with some other references.
3. There is no dispute that the land which has been acquired is jointly won by Smti. Bakul Bala Som and her husband namely Sri Alok Som. Mr. Saha, learned counsel has contended that the objection was filed both by Alok Som and Bakul Bala Som jointly on 15.06.2013. Alok Som and Bakul Bala Som submitted the objection and urged the Land Acquisition Collector to refer the matter to the Land Acquisition Judge for determination of just land value. Accordingly, the reference was made and the case was decided by observing that in L.A.(Ref.)120 of 2013, the claimant Alok Som had only filed the objection before the Land Acquisition Collector with a prayer to refer the matter on the ground of inadequate compensation. But before the court of the Land Acquisition Judge both Alok Som and his wife Smt. Bakul Bala Som jointly submitted the claim petition. Mr. H. Deb, learned Astt. S.G. has submitted that she is not entitled to get the compensation in the enhanced rate. The petitioner Alok Som alone will get the compensation of his share in the enhanced rate. The rate was enhanced to Rs.1,00,000/- per kani from Rs.35,000/- per kani as awarded by the Land Acquisition Collector. The Land Acquisition Judge severed the proceeding and dismissed her claim.
4. Being aggrieved by the said finding, the co-sharer of the acquired land namely Bakul Bala Som has filed this appeal as her claim for the enhanced compensation has been denied by the Land Acquisition Judge. This court has scrutinized the records and finds that only Alok Som, the other co-sharer of the acquired land had raised the objection against the award and clamored for the higher rate at least at Rs.2,00,000/-, per kani meaning Rs.5,00,000/- per acre.
5. Mr. R. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that the husband raised the objection and reaped the benefit but that did not happen in the same way for the present appellant who is the wife of Sri Alok Som. Mr. Saha, learned counsel has strenuously contended that the application for reference was filed for the entire land measuring 0.52 acre which is still an un-partitioned land. Thus denial of the higher compensation is exceptionally illegal and liable to be interfered with.
6. However, Mr. H. Deb, learned Asstt. S.G. appearing for the respondents has submitted that unless the objection as is required to be raised by the person whose land has been acquired and as contemplated under Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act, there cannot be any reference. Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act clearly provides as under :
“Any person interested and has not accepted the award may by written application to the Collector, require that the matter be referred by the Collector for determination of the Court, whether his objection be to the measurement of the land, the amount of the compensation, the persons to whom it is payable or the apportionment of the compensation among the persons interested.”
Furthermore, the appellant shall state the grounds on which objection to the award is taken.
7. Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act has some relevance in respect of advancing any objection under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Section 31 of the Land Acquisition Act provides that :
“(1) On making an award under section 11, the Collector shall tender payment of the compensation awarded by him to the persons interested entitled thereto according to the award, and shall pay it to them unless prevented by some one or more of the contingencies mentioned in the next sub-section.
(2) If they shall not consent to receive it, or if there be n
