TUFANIALONGA TEA CO Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner No. 1-Company and the petitioner No. 2-Company in CM Application No. 6/2001 are owners of Tufanialonga Tea Estate and Laxmilonga Tea Estate located at Teberia, Tripura West. On 13-11-1986, Tripura Tea Companies (Taking Over of Management of Certain Tea Units) Ordinance, 1986, was promulgated by the Government of Tripura and the management of the said two Tea Estates besides other Tea Estates was taken over under the said Ordinance for a period of 5 years. The Ordinance was substituted by an Act. A certificate proceeding was initiated against the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 for non-payment of land revenue and the Tea Estates of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were sold on 4-6-1987 at a token price of Re.1/- and the sale was confirmed on 27-7-1987. The two petitioner Companies challenged the Ordinance and the Act and the sales of the Tea Estates in the certificate proceeding in Civil Rule No. 67/94. by Judgment dated 9-4-1999, a Division Bench of this court while upholding the validity of the Ordinance and the Act set aside the sale of the two Tea Estates to the Government and remitted the matter back to the Revenue Court for taking fresh steps in accordance with the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Act, 1960 and the Tripura Land Revenue and Land Reforms Rules, 1961 for recovery of the arrear land revenue. In the said Judgment some directions were given to the State Government to determine the amount payable to the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 under S. 5 of the Act for the period from 13-1-1986 to 4-6-1987 during which period the management of the two Tea Estates vested in the Government and also to determine the compensation payable to the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 for the period from 4-6-1987 onwards till the date of the Judgment. The Court also directed that pending such determination of amount and compensation by the State Government, the petitioner companies will be paid a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 for each of the two Tea Estates within a period of two months from the date of the said judgment. The Court also directed that if any amount or compensation is not paid within the time stipulated in the said Judgment, the petitioner companies will be entitled to 18% interest per annum on the amounts due to them. Liberty also given to apply to the Court in case of any difficulty arising out of implementation of the aforesaid directions. Despite the said direction no amounts have been paid by the State Government to the petitioner companies and hence the two petitioner companies have filed this miscellaneous application for further directions.

(2.) Mr. G. Chakravorty, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner companies submitted that since a submission was made on behalf of the petitioner companies at the time of hearing of the main writ petition that no amount whatsoever has been paid by the Government to the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 for taking over of the management of the two Tea Estates although S. 5 of the Tripura Tea Companies (Taking Over of Management of Certain Tea Units) Act provided for such payment, the Court directed the State Government to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 for each of the two Tea Estates within a period of two months pending determination of the amount and compensation by the State Government and yet the State Government did not make payment of the said amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 for each of the two Tea Estates. In the circumstances, the two petitioner companies have prayed for a direction for payment of the said sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum as fixed by the court in the Judgment dated 9-4-1999 in CR No. 67/94. He vehemently argued that the management of the two Tea Estates of the petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 - Companies has been taken over by the State Government with effect from 13-11-1986 and till now no amount whatsoever has been paid by the State Government to the two petitioner companies and the Court should forthwith direct payment of Rs.10,00,000.00 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum to the two petitioner companies which is lying in deposit in favour of the Registrar, Gauhati High Court, Agartala Bench.

(3.) Mr. BR Bhattacharjee, learned Advocate General, Tripura, however, submitted that the Government did not pay the said amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 to the two petitioner companies for their respective Tea Estates on account of orders passed by the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Kolkata, on 8-7-1999 restraining the two petitioner companies by an order of injunction from receiving any payment in respect of the two Tea Estates. He further submitted that in any case as per the Judgment of this Court dated 9-4-1999, the sum of Rs.10,00,000.00 was to be paid to each of the two petitioner companies and not to their constituted attorney and hence the said constituted attorney has no locus standi to file this application. He further argued that before the Court passes any order for payment of amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 with interest to the petitioner companies, the Court must consider the possibility of recovery of amount paid to the two petitioner companies in case the amount and compensation found payable to the petitioner companies fall short of the said amount of Rs.10,00,000.00 with interest.