Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2019 Supreme(SC) 194

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA AND OTHERS - Appellants
Vs.
APL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3910, 3911 and 3912 of 2013
Decided On : 21-02-2019

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Parag P. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate, Mr. A. V. Rangam, Advocate, Mr. Buddy A. Ranganadhan, Advocate and Ms. Stuti Krishan, Advocate
For the Respondent:Mr. Chira Ranjan Addy, Advocate, Mr. A. Lakshminarayanan, Advocate and Mr. Rameshwar Prasad Goyal, Advocate, for the Respondent.

IMPORTANT POINT
Estate Officer has power to remove any goods lying on any public premises after order of eviction has been made under Section 5 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

Headnote:Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 – Sections 5A(3) and 6 – Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 – Sections 59 and 61 – Right to seize and dispose of goods and materials lying on public premises – Any person in occupation of public premises without authority for such occupation is an unauthorized occupant – Sub-section (3) of Section 5A authorizes Estate Officer to remove any goods lying on any public premises after an order of eviction has been made under Section 5 of Act – It is immaterial whether goods belong to erstwhile tenant/licensee or to any other party – It is not necessary that persons owning goods lying on premises should be erstwhile tenants/licensees – It is also not necessary that there should be privity of contract between Port Trust and third party to whom such goods and materials belong for disposing of property by Estate Officer under Section 6 – Section 6 of PP Act has been enacted with obvious purpose of enabling statutory authorities to take all consequential steps after receiving possession of public premises and for recovery of dues – Said provision ought not to be
       interpreted in a way which defeats very purpose of its enactment – Section 6 of PP Act must be read independent of and not dependent on Sections 59 and 61 of Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 – Estate Officer under Section 6 of PP Act, is entitled to sell goods even of a stranger, found in/on premises under unauthorized occupation – Appeals disposed of in terms. (Paras 20, 22, 24, 25 and 26)
       Facts of Case:
       Instant appeals, arising out of a reference to Full Bench of Calcutta High Court, raise an important question on meaning, interpretation and applicability of Section 6 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971. Issue revolves around right of appellants to seize and dispose of goods and materials lying on public premises which goods may not necessarily belong to erstwhile tenant/licensee of such public premises under PP Act.
       Findings of Court:
       We are in complete agreement with this submission made on behalf of Port Trust. We are of the view that Section 6 of PP Act has been enacted with obvious purpose of enabling statutory authorities to take all consequential steps after receiving possession of public premises and for recovery of dues, etc. Said provision ought not to be interpreted in a way which defeats very purpose of its enactment. Section 6 of PP Act must be read independent of, and not dependant on, Sections 59 and 61 of MPT Act.
       Result : Appeals disposed of in terms.

JUDGMENT :

S. Abdul Nazeer, J.

These appeals, arising out of a reference to the Full Bench of the Calcutta High Court, raise an important question on the meaning, interpretation and applicability of Section 6 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (for short 'the PP Act'). The issue revolves around the right of the appellants(hereinafter referred to as the "Port Trust") to seize and dispose of goods and materials lying on the "public premises" which goods may not necessarily belong to the erstwhile tenant/licensee of such "public premises" under the PP Act.

2. The brief facts of the case necessary for disposal of these appeals are as under:

3. A piece of land altogether measuring 17238.15 sq. mtr. situated at Transport Depot Road, P.S. Taratola, Kolkata, (for short 'the premises') was allotted to M/s. Shalimar Tar Products Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'the STPL') by way of Deed of Assignment dated 06.12.1963. The STPL stopped the payment of rent to the Port Trust since 1973. The lease in respect of the premises granted in favour of the STPL expired by afflux of time in the year 1981. Therefore, the Port Trust issued a notice dated 31.08.2000 to the STPL to quit the premises and deliver its possession. As the STPL failed to deliver back possession of the premises, the Port Trust initiated the proceedings for eviction, as well as for recovery of arrears of rent and dues on account of unauthorized occupation before the Estate Officer under the provisions of the PP Act.

4. The Estate Officer issued a notice dated 24.01.2006 under Sections 4 and 7 of the PP Act to the STPL. All the concerned persons in occupation of the premises were also notified by affixing the aforesaid notices on the outer wall of the premises. The STPL duly appeared before the Estate Officer.

5. The Estate Officer, upon hearing the Port Trust and the STPL, passed an order of eviction on 09.07.2007, and also directed the STPL to pay damages for unauthorized use and occupation of the premises amounting to Rs. 2,46,64,411/-, calculated upto 30.06.2005, excluding the interest thereon. The Port Trust applied to the Estate Officer for execution of the said order and appointment of an authorized officer for recovery of the possession of the premises under the provisions of the PP Act. On 19.02.2008, the Estate Officer passed an order appointing Smt. Subarna Thakur, Officer-in-Charge (Estate) of the Port Trust as anauthorized officer for recovery of possession in terms of the order of eviction dated 09.07.2007.

6. The authorized officer took possession of the premises and the containers stacked thereon. Immediately upon eviction and taking possession, the Port Trust deployed security guards for protection of the premises. Several containers remained at the premises at the time of taking possession.

7. After taking possession, the authorized officer wrote a letter dated 10.03.2008 informing the Estate Officer that the land has been recovered from the STPL on 08.03.2008 along with the containers stacked on the premises. The Estate Officer passed an order directing the authorized officer to take inventory of the materials/articles/goods lying on the premises in the presence of a competent officer of the Port Trust and also directed the issue of notice under Section 6 of the PP Act for disposal of the properties left by the unauthorized occupant and also to publish a copy of the said notice in the newspaper as per the provisions of the PP Act and the rules made thereunder for disposal of the property lying on the premises. In the said proceedings, the respondent No. 6 appeared on 10.03.2008 and filed an application seeking permission to remove the huge number of containers from the premises. The Estate Officer rejected the application, which has not been questioned by the sixth respondent.

8. In terms of the aforesaid order, a notice under sub-section (1) of Section 6 of the PP Act was issued by the Estate Officer to remove or cause to be removed

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2019 Supreme(SC) 194

SUPREME COURT OF INDIAA.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA AND OTHERS - AppellantsVs.APL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS - RespondentsCivil Appeal No. 3910, 3911 and 3912 of 2013Decided On : 21-02-2019

IMPORTANT POINTEstate Officer has power to remove any goods lying on any public premises after order of eviction has been made under Section 5 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.

Cases Referred (3)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.
BOARD OF TRUSTEES FOR THE PORT OF KOLKATA AND OTHERS - Appellants
Vs.
APL (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3910, 3911 and 3912 of 2013
Decided On : 21-02-2019

IMPORTANT POINT
Estate Officer has power to remove any goods lying on any public premises after order of eviction has been made under Section 5 of Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971.