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

1970 Supreme(Cal) 160

AMIYA KUMAR MUKHERJI, P.N.MUKHERJEE
SATYANARAYAN NATHANY – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA (UOI) – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
C.C.GANGULY, N.K.BHATTACHARJEE, PROVAT KUMAR SENGUPTA, RAM TIRTHA

P. N. MOOKERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS appeal arises under the following circumstances: On March 12, 1942, the appellants premises No. 20, Dum Dum Road was requisitioned under the Defence of India Act (Rule 76) on and from March 16, 1942. On June 10, 1943, there was a further order of requisition in respect of the same premises with effect from June 11, 1943, and the monthly compensation for the above requisition or requisitions was fixed at Rs. 1,765/ -. On November 12, 1946, the above property was derequisitioned. This was followed by a claim for terminal compensation, made by the appellant, in respect of damages, done to the above property by the Requisitioning Authority during the above period of requisition. The appellants' figure for the said claim was Rs. 4,37,106/ -. The State's offer on the point was Rs. 44,355/ -. The above claim was made on April 1, 1947, and the same was reiterated on March 23, 1954, As, however, the State did not agree to the appellants' above figure, there was the inevitable reference to arbitration. In September, 1957, the above property was acquired by the State Government under the Defence of India Act, read with Land Acquisition Act. Before this acquisit











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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top