Sone Valley Portland Cement Company LTD. vs General Mining Syndicate Private LTD.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

1976 Supreme(SC) 306

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
H.R. KHANNA, R.S. SARKARIA AND JASWANT SINGH, JJ.
Sone Valley Portland Cement Co. Ltd., Appellant
Versus
The General Mining Syndicate Pvt. Ltd., Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 1250 of 1968
Decided on 24-8-1976.
Advocates appeared
Mr. D. V. Patel, Sr. Advocate, (M/s. H. K. Puri, S. K. Gupta, P. Dayal and M. C. Dhingra, Advocates with him), for Appellant; Mr. P. K. Chatterjee, Sr. Advocate and G. S. Chatterjee, Advocate with him, for Respondent.

Advocates:
D.V.PATEL, G.S.CHATTERJEE, H.K.PURI, M.C.DHINGRA, P.Dayal, P.K.CHATTERJI, S.C.GUPTA

Headnote:Bihar land Reforms Act-Secs. 2(r), 4(a) 10-A lessee in respect of mineral rights created in July, 1927 by the proprietor of an estate-Lessee granting sub-lease on October 12, 1928 in accordance with the terms of lease- Lessee's rights transferred-Transferee' becoming head-lessee -Whether head lessee's rights vest in the Slate on the notification under the Bihar Land Reforms Act.
       Held, that Section 10 which is in the nature of non-obstante provision overrides the other provisions of the Act and every lease of mines and minerals comprised in the notified estate or tenure or any part thereof which may be subsisting immediately before the date of vesting has to be treated with effect from the date of vesting as a lease from the State Government to the holder of the said subsisting lease for the residue of the term of that lease and such holder acquires the right to retain possession of the leasehold property for that period. In place of every contractual lease which might have been subsisting immediately before the date of vesting of the estate or tenure, a statutory lease or practically identical terms and conditions came into being. The combined effect of sections 4(a) and 10 is that the interests of the head lessee were left unaffected by the notifications.
       Interpretation of Statute-The subsequent amendment can be looked into while interpreting a Statute if the later Act dears up any doubt or ambiguity.
       Held, that sometimes light may be thrown upon the meaning of an Act by taking into consideration parliamentary expositions as revealed by the later Act which amends the earlier Act to clear up any doubt or ambiguity specially where the construction of the earlier Act will render the later incorporated Act ineffectual or otiose or inept.
       Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act (as replaced by 1957)-Sec 9- Mining leases (Modification of Terms) Rules 1956-Whether Sub-lessee entitled to reimbursement of royalty paid to head lessee at a higher rate.
       Held, that for the period July 1, 1958 to August 7, 1959 when the controller passed orders enhancing the loyalty payable to the State under the 1957 Act the sub-lessee continued to pay the said royalty at the old rate and was never required to pay at the enhanced rate and hence there was no question of reimbursement for this period.
       Held, further that for the period August 8, 1959 to March 31, 1961 the expression 'mining lease' includes a 'sub-lease' and the mineral has been removed by the sub-lease it is sub-lessee who is liable to pay royalty at an enhanced rate.

JUDGMENT

JASWANT SINGH, J. :—This appeal by certificate granted under Article 133 (1) (a) and (c) of the Constitution which is directed against the judgment and decree-dated March 25, 1968 of the High Court of Calcutta in Appeal No. 255 of 1963 raises important questions relating to the interpretation of certain provisions of the Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Act XXX of 1950) (hereinafter referred to as the B. L. R. Act) as also of the Mining Leases (Modification of Terms) Rules, 1956 providing for the modification and alteration of terms and conditions of the mining leases granted prior to the commencement of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1948 (Act 53 of 1948) (hereinafter referred to as the 1948 Act) and of the Mines and Minerals (Regulation and Development) Act, 1957 (Act 67 of 1957) (hereinafter referred to as the 1957 Act) which replaced the 1948 Act on June 1, 1958.

2. The facts and circumstances leading to this appeal are : By an indenture of lease dated July 31, 1927 (hereinafter referred to as the head lease). Raja Bishmbharanath Sahi (hereinafter referred to as the Raja) who was the sole proprietor of large tracts of land known as the Sonepura estate in Paragana Rohtas in the district of Shahbad in Bihar demised certain blocks of land situate in village Jaintipur, Nimhath, Deodand and Dhanwanti, District Shahbad, together with quarries of lime stone (known as Chunhatta Lime Stone Quarries) lying thereunder for a period of 40 years commencing from 1st day of August, 1927, and ending on 31st day of July, 1967 with an option to continue for a further period of 25 years, in consideration of a salami and fine of Rupees 8,200/- unto Karunaranan Dutt and Jugalchandra Dutt (hereinafter referred to as Dutts). By the said indenture, the head lessees inter alia undertook to pay to the Raja during the first 15 years of the said period of 4o years of the lease i.e. from the 1st day of August, 1927, to 31st day of July, 1942, royalty at the rate of annas -/10/- (ten) = 62 paise for every 100 cubic feet i.e. roughly at 15 1/2 paise per ton of solid lime stone, quarried, raised, got, used or taken out from the demised premises and for the remaining 25 years of the lease i.e. from the 1st day of August, 1942, to 31 st day of July, 1967, royalty at the rate of annas -/15/- (fifteen) = 94 paise instead of annas -/10/- (ten) for every 100 cubic feet i.e. roughly at 24 paise per ton of solid lime stone, quarried, raised, got, used or taken out from the demised premises. The aforesaid royalty was made payable quarterly i.e. after every three months on the fixed dates specified in the indenture of lease. The head lessees also undertook to pay yearly rent of annas -/6/- (six) per acre subject to the maximum of Rupees 100/- for so much of the surface land as was to be entered upon, used or occupied by them for the purpose of placing stocking and heaping stones waste materials and rubbish etc. The lease deed further provided as follows:-

"That the LESSEES" shall be at liberty and competent without obtaining any further consent of the "LESSOR" to assign and transfer this lease or sublet or part with the possession of the demised premises or any part thereof to any person, firm or company whether incorporated or otherwise and no mutation fee or Nazarana or premium shall be charged by the LESSOR in case of such transfer or subletting for the first time, but in case of subsequent transfer or subletting a fee of rupees five hundred (500/-) shall be payable to the LESSOR for each such occasion.

If the rents and royalties hereby reserved or any part thereof or any other moneys hereunder payable by the LESSEES to the LESSOR shall remain unpaid for three months after the same shall become due and payable the LESSEES shall pay interest thereon at the rate of twelve (12) per cent per annum calculated from the due date until payment. If the same shall remain unpaid for three years consecutively or if there by any breach of any of

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1976 Supreme(SC) 306

Cases Referred (4)