Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S.B.Majmudar : S.Mohan
State Of West Bengal
Versus
Ajoy Kumar Das
Case No. : 488 of 1991
Date of Decision : 2/7/95
Courts Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act1948 - Section 3 - Tenancy Act - Section 5 - Payment of requisitioned compensation - Property was required for public purpose - What happened thereafter is really interesting - On notice was issued by First Land Acquisition Collector Section Bengal Land Requisition and Acquisition Act - notice clearly stated that property was required for public purpose namely for purpose of maintaining supplies and services essential to life of community and for purpose connected therewith or incidental thereto as required by public undertakings department – Held, Postulates valid proceedings Act - proceedings of Theca Tenancy Act in this case are not valid for following reasons property has already vested in State long before notice was issued Theca Tenancy Act namely this is not land to which Theca Tenancy Act would apply as contemplated there is clear bar Section which states nothing in Act shall apply to government land or even lands vested or in possession of State government - Therefore looked at from any point of view notice has no legal basis and therefore whether lands are vested Theca Tenancy statutorily does not arise – Court are clearly of opinion that here is case where State by some means or other wants to deprive citizen of his legitimate rights - As prior narration would indicate by reason of notice Section of Courts Bengal Requisition and Acquisition Act property had come to vest in State of Courts Bengal - Not only that much water had courted under bridge compensation proceedings have gone - There is clear direction to pay compensation by court - More than above is State has suffered command by means of mandamus to complete acquisition which order had become final and binding bet courted parties - What is more surprising to us is that Theca Tenancy Act came into force on admittedly - In other words that Act was on statute book - With knowledge of that Act yet if State chose to invoke provisions of Courts Bengal Land Requisition and Acquisition Act it has done so in our view designedly - Therefore to say statutory vesting Theca Tenancy Act would arise is an argument which court consider to be tenable sic untenable – Appeal dismissed
(1) THE respondents are the owners of Premises No. 17, Convent Road, Calcutta consisting of 9 bighas, 4 cottahs, 9 chhataks, 2 sq. ft. of land together with the factory building and structures. The respondents executed a deed of lease on 29/12/1951, in favour of Westing House Saxby Fanners Limited. The lease is for a period of 30 years. The monthly rent/consideration was of a sum of Rs. 2,500.00. By efflux of time, this 30 years lease came to an end on 31/5/1981. On 23/4/1981 before the expiry of the lease, notice to vacate the premises was issued to the lessees.
(2) ON 18/1/1982, the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Requisition and Acquisition) Act, 1982 came into force. Section 5 of the Act states as follows:
"WITH effect from the date of commencement of the Act, lands comprising in Thika tenancy and other land held by any person in perpetuity or under registered lease for a period not less than 12 years or held in monthly or on a periodical tenancy for any land used as khatals, the rights, title of the landlord in such land shall vest in the State.
"
(3) WHAT happened thereafter is really interesting. On 18/8/1982, notice was issued by the First Land Acquisition Collector under Section 3 of the West Bengal Land (Requisition and Acquisition) Act. 1948. The notice clearly stated that the property was required for a public purpose, namely, for the purpose of maintaining supplies and services essential to the life of the community and for the purpose connected therewith or incidental thereto as required by the public undertakings department.
(4) ON 23/9/1985, a formal order of acquisition under Section 4 of the said Act came to be passed. The legal effect of that order as could be gathered from the said Section (sic 4 is that when a notice to that effect is published, the property shall vest absolutely in the State free from all encumbrances. (This is more or less corresponding to Section 16 of the Land Acquisition Act, central Act 1 of 1894.
(5) ON 7/4/1986. notice under Section 7 of the said Act was served upon the respondents for hearing in relation to fixation of compensation with regard to the property requisitioned. On 4/5/1987, an interim award of compensation was declared by the authority. 80% of the compensation awarded by the State of West Bengal was paid to one of the co-sharers (Amiya Kumar Das). It should also be noticed that the original lessee - M/s Westing House Saxby Farmers Limited had deposited the amount necessary for payment of the requisitioned compensation. It is out of this deposit, that 80% of compensation was paid to one of the co-sharers. When the matter was proceeding on these lines, strangely the respondent was visited with a notice dated 4/8/1987 purporting to be under Section 8 of the Calcutta Thika Tenancy (Requisition and Acquisition) Act. It was stated therein that by virtue of Section 5 of Thika Tenancy Act, the property in question had vested in the State as early as 18/1/1982. Challenging this notice, the respondents filed representation on 28/8/1987. The principal contention was that the land and the premises having already vested in the State on 23/9/1985 by virtue of the proceedings taken under the Requisition and Acquisition Act, there was no scope for issuing notice under the Thika Tenancy Act. However, this representation was rejected by an order dated 4/8/1987. Therefore, the respondents filed Writ Petition No. 4093 of 1987 under Article 226 praying for mandamus to revoke or recall the order of vesting under Section 5 of the Thika Tenancy Act. Ultimately, the rule was made absolute on 14/1/19888. That was appealed against unsuccessfully by the Thika Tenancy Controller in Appeal No. 157 of 1988.
(6) ANOTHER WP No. 341 of 1988 was filed by the respondents to release the compensation awarded in their favour under Section 8 of the Requisition and Acquisition Act. The interim order was passed on 2/5/1988 to release 50% of the compensation. When an appea
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
