TRIPURA TEA DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LIMITED Vs. PEERLESS TEA AND INDUSTRY LIMITED, NOW KAMALA TEA CO. LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Appeals arise from a common Judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 27.09.2016 in W.P. (C) No.257 of 2016. W.A. No.02 of 2017 is filed by the Tripura Tea Development Corporation Limited ('TTDC', for short), original respondent No.3 and W.A. No.11 of 2017 is filed by the State Government and its authority who are original respondents No.1 and 2.

(2.) This litigation has chequered history. Briefly stated the facts are that the original petitioner-Peerless Tea and Industry Limited (hereinafter to be referred to as 'Peerless'), a company registered in the Companies Act, owned and managed Fatikcherra Tea Estate. The management of the Tea Estate was taken over by the Government of Tripura on 10.11.1986 and the management was handed over to TTDC in terms of the provisions of Tripura Tea Company (Taking Over of Management of Certain Tea Units) Act, 1986 (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the said Act of 1986). This Act authorized the State Government by issuing a Notification to take over the management of a Tea Estate initially for a period of 5 years, which period could be extended from time to time. The Act also provided that after taking over the management, during the period the same remained under the management of the State Government or its custodian, the Government would pay to the company annual compensation of such amount as may be specified by this State Government for suspending the right of user.

(3.) Peerless had previously filed a Writ Petition before the Gauhati High Court seeking proper compensation, which was disposed of by the High Court directing the Government to take a final decision within a stipulated time. The Peerless had to file yet another petition W.P. (C) No.401 of 2004 before the Tripura High Court in which it was pointed out that instead of paying any compensation to the petitioner, the Government had raised a demand of Rs.1.41 crores (rounded off). This petition was disposed of by the learned Single Judge by a Judgment dated 08.05.2015. The learned Single Judge was of the opinion that the petitioner-company was entitled to receive adequate compensation for depriving it the right to manage the Estate and the Government cannot take over the management without payment of adequate compensation.