SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1977 Supreme(SC) 186

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.C. GUPTA AND P.S. KAILASAM, JJ.
National Textile Corporation and another, Appellants
Versus
State of Maharashtra and others Respondents.
Civil appeal No. 309 of 1976,
D/- 12-4-1977.
Advocates Appeared
Mr. I. N. Shroff and Mr. H. S. Parihar, Advocates, for Appellants; Mr. M. N. Shroff, Advocate, (for Nos. 1 & 2) and Mr. V. P. Raman, Addl. Sol. Genl. (M/s. K. J. John & Shri Narain, Advocates with him), (for No. 3) for Respondents.

Advocates:
H.K.Parihar, J.V.Shroff, K.J.JOHN, M.A.Shroff, Shri Narain, V.P.Raman

Headnote:

Industries (Development and Regulation) Act,1951 – Section, 3 and 4 - Spinning Weaving and Manufacturing Company - Appointment day in ownership - Court challenging validity of notifications on several grounds- A single Judge of High Court having dismissed writ petition on company preferred a letters patent appeal- During pendency of appeal management of company was taken over by Central Government Industries (Development and Regulation an Ordinance called Sick Textile undertakings (Nationalisation) Ordinance was promulgated by virtue of which textile undertaking of company management of which had been taken over by Central Government vested absolutely in Central Government with effect from "appointed day which was and immediately thereafter stood transferred and vested in National Textile Corporation - Ordinance was later replaced by Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) hereinafter referred to as Sick Textile – Held, Counsel for respondent- State of Maharashtra submits that term incumbrance should take color from different kinds of burden on land specified preceding words all other incumbrances it is argued that incumrbance in context means some burden or liability that is attached to property like mortgage- charge lien etc- That this is so would also appear from what follows words "all other incumbrances affecting it- Having said that vesting will be free from trust obligation mortgage charge lien and all other incumbrances affecting sub goes on to add that "any attachment injunction or decree or order of any court restricting use of such property in any manner shall be deemed to have been withdrawn upon vesting- If appellants construction of provision were correct and incumbrance meant any kind of fetter any attachment- injunction or decree or order restricting use of property would be included in "all other incumbrances and it would have been quite unnecessary to mention them separately- This makes it clear that fetters on property like attachment injunction or decree or order of any court restricting use of property which are deemed to have been withdrawn upon property vesting in Central Government are not really incumbrances within meaning of word as used in – Court therefore agree with High Court that notifications issued of Land Acquisition Act are not incumbrances and cannot be have become inoperative on land in question vesting in Central Government - Appeal dismissed

Judgment

GUPTA, J. - Ahmedabad Jupiter Spinning Weaving and Manufacturing Company Limited was the owner of 5900 sq. yds. of land forming part of its mill premises at Lower Parel in Bombay which was sought to be acquired by the Maharashtra Government for a municipal school. Notifications under Ss. 4 and 6 were issued on June 19, 1961 and May 29, 1964 respectively. The company filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court challenging the validity of the notifications on several grounds. A single Judge of the High Court having dismissed the writ petition on August 11, 1969 the company preferred a letters patent appeal. During the pendency of the appeal, the management of the company was taken over by the Central Government on October 8, 1972 under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act. 1951. On September 21, 1974 an Ordinance called the Sick Textile undertakings (Nationalisation) Ordinance, 1974 was promulgated by virtue of which the textile undertaking of the company the management of which had been taken over by the Central Government, vested absolutely in the Central Government with effect from the "appointed day, which was April 1, 1974, and immediately thereafter stood transferred and vested in the National Textile Corporation. The Ordinance was later replaced by the Sick Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act. 1974 (hereinafter referred to as Sick Textile Act). Ss. 3 and 4 of the Act are as follows:

"3. Acquisition of rights of owners in respect of sick textile undertakings. (1) On the appointed day, every sick textile undertaking and the right, title and interest of the owner in relation to every such sick textile undertakings shall stand transferred to, and shall vest absolutely in, the Central government.

(2) Every sick textile undertaking which stands vested in the Central Government by virtue of sub-s. (1) shall, immediately after it has so vested, stand transferred to, and vested in the National Textile Corporation.

4. General effect of vesting. (1) The sick textile undertaking referred to in S. 3 shall be deemed to include all assets, rights, leaseholds, powers, authorities and privileges and all property, movable and immovable, including lands, buildings, workshops, stores, instruments, machinery and equipment, cash balances, cash on hand, reserve funds, investments and book debts and all other rights and interests in, or arising out of, such property as were immediately before the appointed day in the ownership, possession, power or control of the owner of the sick textile undertaking, whether within or outside India, and all books of account, registers and all other documents of whatever nature relating thereto and shall also be deemed to include the liabilities and obligations specified in sub-s. (2) of S. 5.

(2) All property as aforesaid which have vested in the Central Government under sub-s. (1) of S. 3 shall, by force of such vesting, be freed and discharged from any trust, obligation, mortgage, charge, lien and all other incumbrances affecting it, and any incumbrances affecting it, and any attachment, injunction or decree or order of any court restricting the use of such property in any manner shall be deemed to have been withdrawn.

The other sub-sections of S. 4 are not relevant for the present purpose.

2. The National Textile Corporation applied to the High Court for being substituted in place of the original appellant in the letters patent appeal which was pending and the application was allowed. The main contention on behalf of the substituted appellant in the High Court was that the two notifications under Ss .4 and 6 of the Land Acquisition Act must be held to have become ineffective in view of S. 4 (2) of the Sick Textile Act which provides that all property which vests in the Central Government under S. 3 (1) does so free from all incumbrances affecting it. The High Court dismissed the appeal holding that the notifications under the Land Acquisition Act were not incumbrances within the meanin





Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top