Judgment

JASWANT SINGH, J.- These two appeals by special leave granted by this Court which are directed against the judgment and order dated 20-3-1972 of the High Court of Bombay at Special Civil Applications Nos. 1686 and 1987 of 1969 shall be disposed of by this judgment.

2. The subject-matter of dispute which has wended its way to this Court is a godown, being godwon No. built on Plot No. 37 bearing C. S. No. 130, Elphinstone Estate at Masjid Siding Road, Kurla Street, Bombay-9 which belongs to Port Trust, Bombay. Respondent No. 1 in both the above mentioned appeals viz. M/s. Benett Coleman & Co. got the aforesaid plot No. 37 as also plot No. 36 on lease from the Port Trust. Bombay, on 1st August, 1933 on a yearly rent of Rs. 416.89, On plot No. 37, the said respondent erected some godowns which along with certain other buildings that had grown up in a haphazard manner and could be described as slums were destroyed as a result of terrific explosions which occurred on April 14, 1944 in the Bombay Docks, Being of the view that it was extremely desirable that rebuilding in the devastated area should be carried out on modern principles of town planning. The Bombay Municipal Corporation by its resolution No. 763 dated 23rd November, 1944, declared its intention to formulate a town planning scheme under the provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Act of 1915 the Government of Bombay sanctioned the making of the Scheme by their resolution No. 5355/33 dated 9th July 1945 published in Official Gazette dated 12th July, 1945. As the preparation of the scheme was likely to take time and it was necessary to restrain owners of building in the devastated area from reconstructing them in a haphazard manner which would conflict with the proposed scheme, the Governor of Bombay in exercise of the powers vested in him by virtue of the proclamation dated 4th November, 1939, issued by him under Section 93 of the Government of India Act, 1935 assuming to himself inter alia all the powers vested by or under the Government of India Act, 1935 in either chamber of the Provincial Legislature made an Act called the City of Bombay (Building Works Restriction) Act, 1944 (Bombay Act No. XVIII of 1944) (hereinafter referred to as the Bombay Act 1944) Section 2 of this Act ordained that unless there is anything repugnant in the subject or context, words and expressions used in the Act shall have the same meaning as in the principal Act viz, the City of Bombay Municipal Act, (Bombay III of 1888), Section 3 of this Act prohibited every person during the period of one year from the date of the commencement of the Act to do any work of erecting, re-erecting, constructing, reconstructing, adding to or altering or repairing any building, wall or other structure or any part thereof situated in the area bounded on the South by the northern edge of Carnac Road and Carnac bridge, on the East by the Western edge of the Frere Road, on the North by the southern edge of Elphinstone Road and Sandhurst Road and on the West by the eastern edge of Mohamadally Road or leying out any private street in the said area, except under the authority of a written permission granted by the Commissioner and in accordance with such conditions, if any, as the Commissioner might think fit to specify in the permission: The proviso to the section authorised the Provincial Government to extend the aforesaid period of one year by means of notification published in the Official Gazette. In exercise of the power conferred by the proviso, the Government of Bombay extended the period referred to in Section 3 of the Act in respect of the restriction of building works without permission upto and inclusive of the 31st day of December, 1946. Section 8 of the Act provided that the benefit of any written permission granted under Section 3 shall be annexed to and shall go with the ownership of the building, wall or other structure or private street, as the case may be, in respect of which it was granted and