GAUHATI HIGH COURT ISSUES ORDER ON INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY GUWAHATI V/S ON THE DEATH OF KRISHNA CH BARUAH HIS LEGAL HEIRS TANUJA BARUAH AND 5 ORS

GUWAHATI, India, March 24 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Feb. 20:

1. Heard Mr. A. B. Dey, learned counsel for the applicant/appellant and Mr. O. Laskar, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 to 5. Also heard Ms. D. Das Barman, learned Government Advocate, Assam for the respondent No. 6.

2. The present application has been filed under Section of the 5 Limitation Act, read with Section 14 of the said Act with a prayer to condone the delay of 334 days in preferring an appeal against the impugned orders passed against the applicant/appellant, i.e., Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati (hereinafter referred to as IIT, Guwahati) vide common judgment and order dated 23.02.2024 delivered under the Reference Case Nos. 83/2016 and 84/2016 by the learned District Judge, Kamrup, Amingaon.

3. It is the case of the applicant/appellant i.e. the IIT, Guwahati who is represented by its Registrar. At the instance of the Central Government, the Deputy Collector acquired a huge area of land in North Guwahati under Kamrup (Rural) District in the year 1991 including two separate plots of land owned by one Krishna Ch. Baruah, predecessors in interest of the present respondent Nos. 1 to 5 for establishment of IIT, Guwahati. Pursuant to the said acquisition of land, L .A. Case No. 14/1991 was registered under the provision of Land Acquisition Act 1894. Said Krishna Ch. Baruah did not accept the compensation awarded by the District Collector for the above mentioned two plots of land and submitted separate applications for each plot of land before the Deputy Collector under Section 18 of the L.A. Act and prayed to refer the matters to the Court for determination of adequate compensation for the acquired plots of land.

4. Accordingly, the learned District Judge, Kamrup, Amingaon registered two numbers of Reference cases i.e., Reference Case Nos. 83/2016 and 84/2016. But during pendency of said two Reference Cases, the owner of the land Krishna Ch. Baruah died on 26.10.1994 and his eldest son also died on 17.09.2007. Consequent to the death of said Krishna Ch. Baruah and his eldest son, their legal representative got their names substituted as claimants.

5. The name of the IIT, Guwahati was shown as opposite party No.2 in each case while the Deputy Collector was shown as opposite party No.1 in the above referred Reference Cases.

6. The grievance of the present applicant/appellant, i.e., IIT, Guwahati is that while registering the above noted two Reference Cases, the learned District Judge wrongly impleaded IIT, Guwahati as opposite party No.2 in each case, while the Deputy Collector was impleaded as opposite party No.1. It is stated that the IIT, Guwahati is neither a beneficiary department for the above land acquisition proceeding, nor it is a department in any manner.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816xzEgt7AFB13Q7dcjZ0gPVFHiPYmkgRWKA42UjNBKFyQO&caseno=I.A.(Civil)/3026/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010089672025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.