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

1986 Supreme(SC) 317

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C. G. GHANSHAMDAS
Versus
COLLECTOR OF MADRAS
Decided on, September 12, 1986

Advocates:
A.V.RANGAM, Abdul Khader, D.N.Mishra, J.P.Verghese, SOLI J.SORABJI, T.V.RATNAM

Headnote:

Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 31 - Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 - section 11 - Defense of India Rules, 1939 - Rule 75a - Possession of property was surrendered or delivered to or taken - Constructions of permanent nature - Appellants claim to be co owners land and building bearing Door High Road High Road Madras - Land along with building standing thereon was originally requisitioned provisions of Requisitioning Act for purpose of accommodating NCC Headquarters through Collector Madras - Above property was taken possession - In order to fix compensation for period of five years beginning from Arbitrator was appointed - Arbitrator by his award fixed compensation at per month and compensation was being paid accordingly – Held, Portion judgment of this Court which has been underlined clearly brings out effect of an award - This Court has that award of arbitrator is undoubtedly formal expression decision made by competent authority – Court are also of view that much reliance cannot be placed on definition clause found in section Act since definitions given in that section have to be read subject to context in which expressions defined therein appear in act - Section Act states that in Act unless context otherwise requires words and expressions defined in that section shall carry meaning given to them in various clauses in that section - It is relevant to note that in section Act which arises for consideration before us word order does not appear in isolation - Section states that fee payable Act on memorandum of appeal against an order relating to compensation in any Act for time being in force for acquisition of property for public purposes shall be computed on difference between amount awarded and amount claimed by appellants - Order referred to in section Act need not therefore be an order of civil court as defined in section Code of Civil Procedure but should be an order relating to compensation any Act for time being in force for acquisition of property for public purposes - Appeal dismissed

Judgment

VENKATARAMIAH

( 1 ) THE short question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether under the Tamil Nadu Court-fees and Suits Valuation Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) the court-fee payable on a memorandum of appeal filed under section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (Act 30 of 1952) (hereinafter referred to as the Requisitioning Act) should be computed in accordance with section 51 of the Act or a fixed court-fee is payable under the residuary provision that is Article 3 (iii) (A) (1) (a) of Schedule II to the Act.

( 2 ) THE appellants claim to be the co-owners of the land and building bearing Door No. 745 E. V. R. Periyar High Road (Poonamallee High Road), Kilpauk, Madras. The land along with the building standing thereon was originally requisitioned under the provisions of the Requisitioning Act for the purpose of accommodating the NCC Headquarters through the Collector of Madras. The above property was taken possession of on 9-2-1963. In order to fix the compensation for the period of five years beginning from 9-6-1963 to 20-2-1967, an Arbitrator was appointed. The Arbitrator by his award dated 5-1-1970 fixed the compensation at Rs. 6,000. 00 per month and the compensation was being paid accordingly.

( 3 ) AT this stage it is necessary to refer to the history of the Requisitioning Act. The power to requisition and to acquire immovable property for a public purpose was first provided in the Defence of India Act, 1939 which expired on the 30/09/1946. It was, however, found necessary to retain some of the properties for a longer period in the occupation of the Government. Therefore, it was provided in the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947 that any property which had been requisitioned under the Defence of India Act, 1939, would continue to remain under requisition. Subsequently, the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 that is the Requisitionigng Act with which we are concerned in this case was passed in the year 1952 to confer powers on the Government in this regard. The Act was initially to operate for a period of six years but its duration was extended from time to time. The Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property (Amendment) Act, 1970 made the Requisitioning Act a permanent measure but restricted the period for which a requisitioned property could be retained under requisition to three years from the commencement of the above said Amendment Act in the case of properties requisitioned before such commencement and in the case of any other property requisitioned after such commencement to three years from the date on which possession of such property was surrendered or delivered to or taken by the competent authority under section 4 of the Requisitioning Act. Thus properties requisitioned before the commencement of the said Amendment Act could be retained under requisition up to the 10/03/1973. A large number of properties requisitioned under the Requisitioning Act could not be released by the said date and the maximum period for which properties could be kept under continued requisition was extended for a further period of two years by the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property (Amendment) Act, 1973. A number of properties requisitioned under the Requisitioning Act were still in possession of the Ministry of Defence and also some other Ministries. Although the Government was expeditiously implementing the policy of acquiring or de-requisitioning the requisitioned properties, a large number of them were expected to be needed by the Government even after the 10/03/1975 for public purposes. On many of the properties valuable constructions of a permanent nature connected with the national defence or the conduct of military operations or other important public purposes had been put up. Due to financial stringency, it was not possible either to acquire the properties or take up large s





























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