This is just to correct some misapprehensions, not to enter the thread in general.
akasi chin is a land grew noting,India really want take it back?
No, indeed, there is no incentive to take back any real estate in Aksai Chin.
It is of value, strategic value, only to PRC.
Indian parliamentary experts have to figure out a way to 'cede' territory to another country in case of a peace treaty that permanently transfers Aksai Chin to PRC.
If India had it then Tibet will be controlled by India,right?
No, there is no way that Tibet can be controlled by India if India regains complete access to Aksai Chin.
Look at the maps.
The population centres in Tibet are mainly concentrated in southern Tibet (not what is known as south Tibet in current diplomatic speak, but the Xigatse Lhasa belt) and eastern Tibet, what used to be known as Kham. Northern and central Tibet are essentially barren.
Aksai Chin gives convenient road access to the populated zone between Xigatse and Manasarovar to the Chinese Military Region of Lanzhou. Strangely, because of the layout of the land, it is relatively easy to get to southern Tibet from Xinjiang, and if the approaches from Qing Hai through Kham are blocked by hostile irregulars, as they were when the PRC wanted to move in, the Xinjiang route may have been a convenient way to get around using comparatively less stiffly contested terrain.
I am saying this without knowledge of the detailed deployment of the PLA in 1959. This is subject to verification.
So Aksai Chin matters to China, it doesn't matter to India.