ABDUL SATAR AHMEDBHEY Vs. STATE OF BOMBAY
LAWS(BOM)-1962-1-2
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on January 19,1962

ABDUL SATAR AHMEDBHEY Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF BOMBAY Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE AND FISHERIES V. MATHEWS [REFERRED TO]
SHIRINBAI A. IRANI V. DOMINION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF BOMBAY VS. BHANJL MUNJI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. RAM KANWAR [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)THIS is suit substantially foe ejectment of the 3rd Defendant Society from out of Shops Nos. 3 and 4 on the ground floor of an immoveable property situate at Dadar and mentioned in the Plaint. For the purposes of the above relief it has become essential for the Plaintiffs to challenge the validity of a requisition order dated February 20, 1957, and an allotment order dated May 22, 1958. This suit may therefore be described as suit for challenging the validity of the above two orders. The Plaintiffs have also challenged the validity of a prior requisition order dated December 11, 1943, and a de-requisition order dated October 14, 1957. As I will point out whist dealing with the contentions of the Plaintiffs, it appears to me that the challenge to these previous requisition and de-requisition order is irrelevant to be considered in this suit.
(2.)IN respect of the facts leading to this litigation except on the minor matter there is no substantial dispute between the parties. These facts are as follows:-The Plaintiffs are trustees of a Wakf and own the immoveable property wherein the above two shops are situate. Prior to December 1943 one Karamshi Umershi was the tenant of the above shops. In these shops Karamshi carried on business of a licensed ration shop for foodgrains. By an order dated December 11, 1943, the Collector of Bombay, in pursuance of the powers vested in him under sub-rule (I) of R. 75-A of the Defence of India Rules read with Notification No. 1336/o. R. /1/42 dated April 25, 1942, requisitioned these shops and directed possession thereof to be delivered to the Assistant Director of Civil Supplies (Grain Shops ). On December 20, 1943, in pursuance of the above order, Karamshi went out of possession. The possession was delivered to the Controller of Government Grain Shops on behalf of the Director mentioned in the requisition order. The Government through its agents thereafter conducted distribution of grain and ration shop through these shops. Compensation was fixed in that connection and the compensation was from time to time recovered by the Plaintiffs. The emergency as mentioned in the Defence of India Act and Rules came to an end in September 1946. In that connection Ordinance 19 of 1946, Act XVII of 1947 entitled "requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act" and Act IX of 1951 were enacted and requisition orders in existence were (deemed to be) extended. The period of extension provided by the above last Act was different in respect of lands requisitioned " by or under the authority of the Central Government" and lands requisitioned by or under the authority of a State (Province ). Under the provisions of this Act lands which were requisitioned by a State were to cease to be under requisition on March, 31, 1951, and lands requisitioned by the Central Government were to cease to be under requisition on March 31, 1952. Before expiry of the period of March 31, 1952, by Act XXX of 1952 (enacted on March 15, 1952) entitled "the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immoveable Property Act, 1952," permanent provision was made for requisition and continuance of lands under requisition for the "purpose of the Union and other public purposes". Under Section 24 of this Act property which immediately before the date of the Act was subject to requisition under the date of the Act was subject to requisition IX of 1951) is deemed to be property requisitioned under Section 3 of the Act and all the provisions of the Act are applicable to such requisitioned property.
(3.)ACCORDING to the defence in this case, the shops in suit were requisitioned under the authority of and for the purposes of the Central Government and having regard to the provision of Section 24 validly continued subject to requisition under this Act from and after March 15, 1952. The plaintiffs deny this and contend that from March 31, 1952, the shops were not subject to any valid requisition in any event.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.