M.M. Dutt, J. - (1.) THIS appeal is at the instance of the referring claimant Baidyanath Bayen and it is directed against the order of the District Judge, Murshidabad, holding that in view Section 45A and B of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, he has no jurisdiction to entertain and dispose of the reference cases under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.
(2.) THE disputed land measuring 4.10 acres appartains to C.S. plot No. 1523, Khatian No. 469, Mouza Boargachi, in the district of Murshidabad. It was required by the Government of West Bengal under provisions of the West Bengal Land Development and Planning Act on or about June 28, 1951. The Respondent Berhampore Bank Ltd. was the mortgagee in respect of a portion of the disputed land. By an order of this Court dated November 18, 1949, this Court directed the winding up of the Respondent Bank. After the disputed land was acquired, a final mortgage decree was passed in favour of the Respondent Bank by the High Court on August 7, 1956. On March 25, 1958, the Collector made an award of compensation in the joint names of the Appellant and the Respondent. The Appellant, who was a tenant in respect of the disputed land, claims that he is entitled to the whole of the amount of compensation, while the Respondent who, as aforesaid was the mortgagee, makes a similar claim. Both of them not being satisfied with the award of the Collector made two separate applications under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act before the learned District Judge, Murshidabad, each claiming the entire amount of compensation and enhancement of the same. The application of the Respondent Bank Was numbered as L.A. Case No. 34 of 1961 and that of the Appellant as L.A. Case No. 36 of 1961. In this appeal, we are concerned with L.A. Case No, 36 of 1961. The learned District Judge took the view that in view of Sections 45A and 45 B of the Banking Companies Act, 1949, as amended in 1953 and renamed as the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, by the Banking Laws (Application to Co -operative Societies) Act, 1965, the High Court alone has jurisdiction to dispose of the reference cases and that he has no jurisdiction in the matter. He has disposed of the said reference cases by the aforesaid finding without any direction as to the return of the applications under Section 18 for presentation to the High Court.
(3.) THE only question that is involved in this appeal is whether the application under s, 18 of the Land Acquisition Act filed by the Appellant is barred by the provisions of Sections 45A and 45B of the Banking Regulation Act. Sections 45A and 45B are as follows: 45A. Part III -A to override other laws.' - -The provisions of this part and the rules made thereunder shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in the Companies Act, 1956, or the, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, or the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, or any other law for the time being in force or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law but the provisions of any such law or instrument insofar as the same are not varied by, inconsistent with the provisions of this part or rules made thereunder shall apply to all proceedings under this part. 45B. Power of High Court to decide all claims in respect of banking companies. - -The High Court shall, save as other wise expressly provided in Section 45C, have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain and decide any claim made by Or against a banking company which is being wound up including claims by or against any of its branches in India or any application made under Section 39 of the Companies Act, 1956, by or in respect of a banking company or any question of priorities or any other question whatsoever; whether of law or fact, which may relate to or arise in the course of the winding up to a banking company, whether such claim or question has arisen or arises or Such application has been made or is made before or after the date of the order for the winding up of the banking company or before or after the commencement of the Banking Companies (Amendment) Act, 1953. By Section 45B exclusive jurisdiction has been conferred on the High Court to decide - -(i) any claim made by or against a banking company which is being wound up, (ii) any application made under Section 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, (iii) any question of priorities, (iv) any other question whether of law or fact, which may relate to or arise in the course of the winding up of a banking company.;