Decided on December 22,1983

Tanwir Eqbal And Ors. Appellant
Union of India And Ors. Respondents


Murari Mohan Dutt, J. - (1.) In this appeal, the appellants have challenged the propriety of the judgment and order of the learned single Judge of this Court whereby the learned Judge discharged the Rule Nisi issued on the application of the appellants under Article 226 of the Constitution.
(2.) One Sk. Golam Rasul, the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants, purchased the Premises No. 6, Harinbari 1st Lane, Calcutta-73 from one Musstt. Khadija Bai alias Khatun by a registered conveyance dated 1.9.69. It may be stated here that the said premises have been in occupation of a few tenants. The appellants received a notice dated 21.4.79 issued by the Assistant Custodian of the Enemy IB Property alleging that the said Musstt. Khadija Khatun was a Pakistani National and that the said premises was an Enemy Property. Further, If it was stated in the said notice that the property vested in the Asstt. Custodian of Enemy Property for India under Government of India, Ministry of Commerce, Notification No. 12/2/65-E. pty. dated 10.9.65, issued under Rule 133V of the Defence of India Rules, 1962. The appellants were called upon by the said notice to show cause within ten days of the receipt of the same why the rents and profits of the said premises described as the Enemy Property should not be collected by the Assistant Custodian and why the Appellants should not forthwith deposit the rents and profits so far collected by them since 10.9.65 with the Assistant Custodian.
(3.) As directed, the appellants submitted an answer to the show cause notice. It was alleged by the appellants that the said Mustt. Khadija Khatun was not a Pakistani National and accordingly, the property, being Premises No. 6, Harinbari 1st Lane, Calcutta, was not an Enemy Property. Before the expiry of ten days of the submission of reply by the appellants to the said show cause notice, the Asstt. Custodian of Enemy Property by his letter dated 23.4.79 asked the tenants of the premises in question not to pay rents to the appellants but to pay the same to him. Being aggrieved by the said show cause notice as also the action of the Asstt. Custodian of Enemy Property demanding rents and profits from the tenants the appellants moved a writ petition before a learned single Judge of this Court and obtained a Rule Nisi. As stated already, the learned Judge, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions made on behalf of either party, discharged the Rule Nisi. Hence, this appeal.;

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