[1] When the case is called , both parties are present before this Court.

[2] This present appeal has been filed under Section 54 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, against the Judgment and Award dated 08.01. 2024 passed in CM (L.A.) No. 110 of 2022 seeking the following reliefs :-

               “(i) Admit the instant appeal;

               (ii) Issue notice upon the respondents to show cause as to why the impugned judgment/award dated 08.01.2024 passed in CM L.A. 110 of 2022 by the learned L.A. Judge, South Tripura, Sabroom shall not be set-aside;

               (iii) Call for the records of case no. CM. L.A. 110 of 2022 from the court of the learned L.A. Judge, South Tripura, Sabroom.

               AND

               (iv) After hearing both the sides may kindly set aside the impugned judgment and award dated 08.01.2024 passed in CM L.A. 110 of 2022 by the learned L.A. Judge, South Tripura, Sabroom;

               AND

               (v) Pass any other order/orders and/or direction/ directions as may deem fit and proper having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.”

               AND for this act kindness the humble appellant, as in duty bound shall ever pray.

[3] The brief facts of the case is that as per the requisition of the appellant, the land of the respondent-claimants, were acquired by the respondent no.2 i.e. the Land Acquisition Collector, South Tripura, vide notification dated 07.01.2013 for construction of 'New Railway line from Agartala to Sabroom'. Accordingly, the L.A. Collector, South Tripura, Sabroom, has awarded the compensation @ Rs. 1,75,000/- per kani. Being aggrieved by the amount of compensation, the respondents-claimant filed an application under Section 18 of the L.A. Act, 1894, for referring the matter to the L.A. Judge, South Tripura, Sabroom, and, accordingly, the same was referred to the court of learned L.A. Judge, Thereafter the learned L.A. Judge, South Tripura, Sabroom, after hearing both the parties, by its judgment dated 08.01.2024 has allowed the claim petition enhancing the award of compensation at the rate of Rs.14,40,000/- per kani and also enhanced the value of standing trees. Hence, this appeal.

[4] Heard and perused the evidence on record.

[5] The appeal is filed by the appellant pointing out the infirmities committed by the Trial Court that the compensation has been awarded without framing an issue to the extent of deciding whether the respondent-claimants are the lawful land owner to receive the said compensation or whether they are the unauthorized persons claiming for the compensation and, since, the matter was not decided considering the said issue straightway the Court below has awarded compensation and aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed making the submission as a major ground for consideration .

[6] Learned counsel for the appellant further submits that in identical matters number of such appeals were disposed of remanding the matter to the Trial Court for framing an issue on the point of owner ship and then, to award compensation upon the authorized person and prayed to remand the matter .

[7] Admittedly, in this appeal there is no issue framed as rightly pointed out by the counsel for the appellant and there is no reasoning as per the evidence that the respondents-claimant are the authorized persons to receive the compensation under the capacity of the lawful owner. This Court, in earlier matters observed that if land of a lawful owner is acquired he is obviously entitled for a generous compensation. Since, day by day the land is getting extinguished and it is utilized for better purpose and benefit of the society. But, at the same time this Court is of the view that unless it is decided that the recipient of the claim-amount is holding a valid alienable title, it cannot be said that he is entitled for claiming the compensation and any entry in the khatian cannot be treated as document for ownership of the land and it is only an entry in revenue records. An unauthorized person cannot be paid a single rupee from the public exchequer.

[8] Accordingly, the matter needs to be remanded back and thus, the present appeal is allowed setting aside the impugned order dated 08.01.2024 passed by the Trial Court, to frame an issue on the point of owner ship and to decide the case receiving documents, if any, and also the argument by giving an opportunity to both sides as per procedure. The said decision be taken as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

[9] With the above observation and direction, the impugned order dated 08.01.2024 passed in CM LA 110 of 2022 is set aside and the appeal is remanded back and accordingly, the same is disposed of.

[10] As a sequel, stay if any, stands vacated. Pending application(s), if any, also stands closed.