Judgment · High Court

Sri Abinash Sarkar & Anr. Respondent(s) Versus For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : : Mrs. S Deb (Gupta), Advocate. Ms. Rumpa Dey, Advocate None HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE T. AMARNATH GOUD ORDER

21.11.2023 This review petition has been filed under Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure for seeking the following reliefs:

i. Admit this review petition. ii. Call for the record of LA. App. 29 of 2022. iii. Issue notice upon the respondents. iv. After hearing both the parties Your Lordship will be graciously pleased to modify/review the judgment and order dated 12.09.2023 passed in L.A App No. 29 of 2022 in the light of the other judgments in respect of the same acquisition and same land and would be kind enough to pass such area of order/orders as Your Lordship deem fit and proper for ends of justice.

Brief facts of the case is that land of the claimant was acquired by the respondent no.2 i.e. the L.A Collector, West Tripura vide notification No.F.9(13) Rev/ACQ/VI/98, dated 17.07.1997 and subsequently by another notification the land was acquired vide notification No.F.9(12)Rev/ACQ/VI/99, dated 08.07.1998 under section 4 of the L.A Act 1894 for the extension of runway of Agartala Airport ( Northern Side).

Being dissatisfied with the land valuation, the claimant approached the Ld. Court below. Thereafter, the Ld. LA Judge in Misc. App. No. 167 of 2014 by an order dated 04.02.2019 awarded a compensation @ Rs. 2,00,000/- per kani, although a review petition was preferred but the Ld. LA Judge rejected the review order on 13.05.2022. Lastly, the petitioner filed an appeal being No. LA. App no. 29 of 2022 before this Court for reducing the compensation but the same was dismissed. Mrs. S Deb (Gupta), learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits before this Court that by a judgment and award dated 07.11.2019 passed in L.A App. 64 of 2018, this court has modified the value of land @ Rs.70,000/- per kani. It is also evident from the record that the land in question so acquired has been determined @ Rs.2,00,000/- per kani in the same area under same notification by a judgment and order dated 12.09.2023 passed by this Court in LA. App No.

29 of 2022. In view of the above submission, this court is of the opinion that the ground on which learned counsel for the petitioner is now arguing is neither raised in the pleadings nor any supporting document is filed in support of their submission before this court. Hence, it is needless to mention that the scope of review is very limited and accordingly the same is dismissed. As a sequel, stay if any stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any also stands closed. JUDGE Paritosh SABYASACHI GHOSH SABYASACHI GHOSH +05'30'