AGARTALA, India, May 27 -- Tripura High Court issued the following order/judgement on April 27:

This application is filed to condone the delay of 227 days in preferring a Revision Petition challenging the order dt.02.04.2025 passed in Civil Misc. (Condo) No.01 of 2025 of the Land Acquisition Judge, Court No.1, West Tripura, Agartala.

There was some ambiguity in the legal position on the aspect as to whether there was a necessity to file a separate Revision against such orders or whether it can be challenged in the RSA filed against the main order in the First Appeal under Section 96 CPC which had been clarified by this Court in the case of Askir Ali v. Mabaswir Ali & others [RSA No.44/2025 a/w CRP No.01/2026].

As per the said clarification, it was incumbent on the part of the applicant to also challenge by way of Revision separately, the order passed in the delay condonation application.

In the instant case, it was pointed out to the petitioner that since the order in an application under or. 9 Rule 13 CPC is appealable, and he had already filed an FAO against it, he should also file a CRP against the order in the application for condonation of delay. So the instant CRP came to be filed.

Both the counsel for the respondents do not oppose the condonation of delay.

Therefore, this application is allowed. The delay in filing the Revision is condoned.

I.A. No.01 of 2026 stands disposed of

CRP No.18/2026 along with FAO No.03/2025:

1. Heard Mr. Bidyut Majumder, Deputy S.G.I. appearing for the petitioner/appellant and Mr. Samrat Sarkar, counsel for respondent No.1 as well as Mr. P. Gautam, Sr. G.A. appearing for the respondent No.2-L.A. Collector.

2. The petitioner in the Revision as well as the appellant in the appeal, is the Deputy Chief Engineer (Con-2), Northeast Frontier Railway, Badharghat, Agartala, West Tripura.

3. The land of the respondent No.1 had been acquired under the provision of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short, L.A. Act) through a notification issued on 16.07.2009 for construction of new Railway Line from Agartala to Sabroom.

4. After the award was passed, an application under Section 18 of the L.A. Act was made by the respondent No.1 before the respondent No.2. The respondent No.2 then made the reference under Section 18 of the Act to the Court of the Land Acquisition Judge, West Tripura, Agartala and the said reference was numbered as Misc. (L.A.) 01 of 2020.

5. The Court then issued notice to the petitioner/appellant and also to the respondent No.2 and fixed 02.04.2020 as the next date of hearing.

6. The notice issued by the Court was served on the petitioner/ appellant, but the petitioner/appellant did not appear before the said Court and contest the case; and on 17.03.2022, an order was passed stating that the case will proceed ex parte against him.

7. Thereafter, issues were framed on the said date and judgment was delivered on 14.12.2023 in the Misc.(L.A.) No.01 of 2020 enhancing the compensation.

8. The petitioner/appellant filed Civil Misc.(Condo) No.01 of 2025 under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 for condonation of delay of 156 days in filing the Civil Misc. application for setting aside the ex parte judgment dt.14.12.2023 in the Misc.(L.A.) No.01 of 2020.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=I1mmm2bl4r4EREhYK63Kv4deIlS53HvhVH5WaHQG5rs%2F8wpSLxoOwy2qJJkCd0zL&caseno=CRP/18/2026&cCode=1&cino=TRHC010002482026&state_code=20&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.