The obligation to pay the full premium for goods under the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1962, arose during the Act's existence, and investigations for non-compliance could continue after the Act's expiry as per S.1(3) of the Goods Act.

1. The question raised in this appeal is covered by a direct authority of this Court against the appellant which has been referred to by Gopalan Nambiyar J., in the judgment under appeal; the decision in M/s. Marikar Motors Ltd. v. The Chief Enforcement Officer, Emergency Risks Insurance Scheme, Madras and Another AIR. 1973 Ker. 2. A Division Bench of the Madras High Court in the decision in M/s. Stoneware Pipes (Madras) Ltd. v. Union of India AIR. 1971 Mad. 442 has taken a different view. The question turns on the interpretation of S.1 (3) of the Emergency Risks (Goods) Insurance Act, 1962, for short, the Goods Act, and S.1 (3) in identical terms of the Emergency Risks (Factories) Insurance Act, 1962, for short, the Factories Act. We shall extract the sub-section from the Goods Act:

"It shall remain in force during the period of operation of the Proclamation of Emergency issued on the 26th October, 1962 and for such further period as the Central Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare to be the period of emergency for the purposes of this Act, but its expiry shall not affect any thing done or omitted to be done before such expiry and S.6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, shall apply upon the expiry of this Act as if it had been repealed by a Central Act."

2. That the appellant before us, M/s. Gwalior Rayon Silk Mfg., (Wvg), Co., Ltd., (Pulp Division), was governed by the above Acts is admitted. That they were liable to take out policies of Insurance as envisaged by the Acts is also admitted. That they were the sellers or suppliers of goods of the description referred to in S.3 is further admitted. In fact they had taken policies of insurance of such goods during the time the Acts were in force. The emergency ceased in 1968 and so the Acts also ceased to exist in 1968. The authorised officer purporting to act under S.8(1) of the Goods Act issued notices to the appellant to furnish certain information for determining whether the appellant had failed to insure as required by the Goods Act or atleast had failed to insure to the full amount as required by the Act. The notices were issued after the Acts ceased to exist. A contention has been raised in the Original Petition that notwithstanding the provisions in S.1(3) of the Goods Act and the provisions in S.6 of the General Clauses Act, 1897 no investigations can be made by the authorised officer after the expiry of the Acts to determine whether there has been insurance to the full extent as required by the Act and it is therefore prayed that the notices be quashed, and Nambiyar J., refused to grant the reliefs and dismissed the petition. The learned judge has referred to the relevant provisions of the Act and has extracted them in the judgment under appeal. We do not think it necessary to extract all those sections again in this judgment though we think, we should read S.7 and 8 of the Goods Act:

7. (1) While the Scheme is in operation, no person shall, after such date as may be specified in this behalf by the Central Government by notification in the Official Gazette, carry on any business in India as a seller or supplier of goods, unless, in respect of any goods insurable under this Act which are for the time being owned by him in the course of that business, there is in force a policy of insurance against emergency risks issued in accordance with the Scheme, whereby he is insured in respect of such goods for a sum not less than the value thereof for the time being:

Provided that the Scheme shall not restrict the carrying on of business as aforesaid by any person, if and so long as the value of all goods insurable under this Act which are for the time being owned by him within one and the same Presidency town or district in the course of that business does not exceed thirty thousand rupees.

(1) Whoever contravenes the provisions of this section shall be punishable with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees and with further fine which may e