JUDGMENT

MATHEW, J.:—We first take up for consideration Civil Appeals Nos. 506-510 of 1971.

2. The appellants in these appeals filed writ petitions before the Andhra Pradesh High Court questioning the validity of notices issued by the 2nd respondent therein under the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act (Act 62 of 1962) and the Emergency Risks (Factories) Insurance Act (Act 63 of 1962) (hereinafter referred to as the Acts collectively and individually as the Goods Act and the Factories Act respectively). The impugned notices stated that the appellants had evaded payments of emergency risks insurance premiums in respect of goods or factories, as the case may be, by undervaluing the goods or factories for the purpose of insuring them under the Acts. A learned single Judge of the High Court allowed the writ petitions on the ground that, after the expiry of the Acts, there could be no authorized officer to determine the quantum of the evaded premia on the basis of the correct value of the goods or factories. Appeals were filed against the orders, and a Division Bench of the Court, by a common judgment, held that the liability to pay the evaded premiums arose during the currency of the Act and that the extent of the liability could be ascertained by an authorized officer even after the expiry of the Acts and allowed the appeals. These appeals are directed against the common judgment.

3. The President of India, after the Chinese aggression in October, 1962, proclaimed an Emergency under Article 352 of the Constitution on 26-10-1962. The proclamation was revoked by the President on 10-1-1968. The Acts came into force with effect from 1-1-1963.

4. The Acts were in substance similar to War Risks Insurance Acts which were in force in the United Kingdom during the Second World War. It was realised after the Chinese aggression that it was necessary to make provision, if possible on war footing, for reinstating the factories damaged or ruined by enemy action and for reimbursing the loss or damage of goods and continue the commercial and economic activity with a view to stabilize the economy of the country. In view of the magnitude of the task, no private agency in the field of insurance could have undertaken it. By the Acts, the Central Government undertook the task of insuring factories and goods against loss or damage sustained by enemy action.

5. The Acts in substance provided for compulsory insurance against emergency risks of every person carrying on business as a seller or supplier of goods in respect of the insurable goods, which were from time to time owned or deemed to have been owned by him in the course of such business, if the insurable value of such goods lying in one and the same city or district exceeded Rs. 30,000/- and of all factories falling within the purview of the Factories Act, 1948. The schemes framed under the Acts provided for procedural matters relating to the mode of valuation of the insurable goods and assets, receipt of applications for the issue of policies, payment of premium, the terms and conditions attaching to such policies and settlement of claims and other matters.

6. The provisions of the two Acts were more or less similar. We 961 would now refer to certain provisions of the Factories Act . Under Section 1 (3) of that Act, it was provided that the Act would remain in force during the period of operation of the proclamation of emergency issued on 26-10-1962 and for such further period as the Central Government might declare to be the period of emergency for the purpose of the Act. It was also provided in that section that the expiry of the Act shall not affect anything done or omitted to be done before such expiry and S. 6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, shall apply upon the expiry of the Act as if it were repealed by a Central Act.

7. Section 2(f) of that Act defined `insurable value of property as the value of the property as ascertained for the purpose of insurance under the Act. Section 2