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

1958 Supreme(Cal) 181

HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
B. N. Banerjee
SATYA CHARAN SUR - Appellant
Versus
STATE OF WEST BENGAL - Respondent
Reference Under Court-Fees Act In F. A. T.  1775  Of  1956
Decided On : JUNE 24, 1958

Advocates Appeared:
BHABESH CHANDRA MITTER, N.C.CHAKRAVARTI

An award made under Section 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act is an order within the meaning of Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, and in an appeal against such an award, court fees under Schedule I, Article 1 of the Court Fees Act are payable on the difference between the amount awarded by the arbitrator and that claimed by the appellant.

Headnote:

COURT FEES - Acquisition of Land - Public Purpose - Computation of Court Fees - Arbitrator's Award - Fixed Court Fees.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant challenged the compensation awarded by an arbitrator appointed under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, by filing an appeal. The issue arose as to whether fixed court fees under Schedule II, Article 11 of the Court Fees Act were payable or ad valorem court fees were required.

Finding of the Court:

The court held that an award made under Section 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act is an order within the meaning of Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, and in an appeal against such an award, court fees under Schedule I, Article 1 of the Court Fees Act are payable on the difference between the amount awarded by the arbitrator and that claimed by the appellant.

Issues: 1. Whether the question of whether acquisition was made for public purposes or not should be considered in computing court fees under Section 8 of the Court Fees Act in an appeal against an order of an arbitrator appointed under Act XXX of 1952? 2. Whether fixed court fees are payable under Schedule II, Article 11 of the Court Fees Act in an appeal against the order of an arbitrator, in view of the Bombay decision reported in Hirji Virji Jangbari v. Govt. of Bombay, AIR 1945 Bom 348?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The question of whether an acquisition was made for public purposes is not relevant in determining court fees payable on an appeal against an award for compensation under Act XXX of 1952, as such an appeal proceeds on the basis that the acquisition was valid and for a public purpose. 2. An award made under Section 7 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act is an order within the meaning of Section 8 of the Court Fees Act, and in an appeal against such an award, court fees under Schedule I, Article 1 of the Court Fees Act are payable on the difference between the amount awarded by the arbitrator and that claimed by the appellant.

Final Decision: Both questions referred by the Taxing Officer under Section 5 of the Court Fees Act were answered in the negative.

B. N. BANERJEE, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a reference under Section 5 of the Court-fees Act.

( 2 ) THE Registrar of the Appellate Side of this Court, as the Taxing Officer, referred two questions for consideration, on the ground that they were matters of general importance, viz. , :--"i. If the question, whether acquisition was made for public purposes or not should be gone into, in computing Court fees under Section 8 Court fees Act, in an appeal against an order of the Arbitrator appointed under Act XXX of 1952. II. Whether fixed Court-fee is payable under Schedule II, Article 11 of the Court-fees Act in an appeal against the order of the Arbitrator, in view of the Bombay decision reported in Hirji Virji Jangbari v. Govt. of Bombay, AIR 1945 Bom 348. "

( 3 ) THE circumstances giving rise to the above two questions may be summarised as hereinbelow :

( 4 ) TWO plots of land were requisitioned for military purposes under Sub-rule (1) of Rule 75a of the Defence of India Rules. On the expiry of the Defence of India Act, 1939 the lands in dispute continued to remain under requisition, at first under the provisions of the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Ordinance 1946, (Ordinance XIX of 1946) and thereafter under the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947 (Act XVII of 1947 ).

( 5 ) UNDER Section 5 of the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act 1947, power was given to the appropriate Government to acquire requisitioned land under certain circumstances. The material portions of Section 5 of the said Act (Act XVII of 1947) are quoted hereinbelow :--"5 (1 ). Subject to the provisions of Sub-section (3), the appropriate Government may, at any time when any requisitioned land continues to be subject to requisition under Section 3, acquires such land by publishing in the Official Gazette a notice to the effect that such Government has decided to acquire such land in pursuance of this section. (2) * * * (3) No requisitioned land shall be acquired under this section except in the following circumstances, namely :-- (a) where any works have during the period of requisition been constructed on, in or over the land wholly or partly at the expense of Government and the appropriate Government decides that the value of, or the right to use, such works should be preserved or secured for the purposes of Government; or (b) where the cost of restoring the land to its condition at the time of its requisition would, in the determination of the appropriate Government, be excessive having regard to the value of the land at that time and the owner declines to accept the release from requisition of the land without payment of compensation from Government. 4. Any decision or determination of the appropriate Government under Sub-section (3) shall be final, and shall not be called in question in any Court".

( 6 ) IN exercise of the powers conferred on it under Section 5 of the aforesaid Act, the Government of India decided to acquire the plots of land in dispute, along with other plots of land, and caused publication of a notice, under Section 5 (1) of the said Act, dated February 18, 1949, in the Calcutta Gazette of the date March 3, 1949.

( 7 ) THE Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947 was repealed by the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (Act XXX of 1952 ). Under Section 7 of the latter Act power was given to the Central Government to acquire requisitioned property for a public purpose. The material portion of Section 7 of Act XXX of 1952 are quoted below :--"7 (1 ). Where any property is subject to requisition, the Central Government may, if it is of opinion that it is necessary to acquire the property for a public purpose, at any time acquire such property by publishing in the Official Gazette a notice to the effect that the Central Government has decided to acquire the property in pursuance of this section : provided that before issuing such notice, the Central Government shall cal





















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