LexSTATE OF TAMIL NADU versus M/S. AROORAN SUGARS LTD.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
STATE OF TAMIL NADU A v. MIS. AROORAN SUGARS LTD. OCTOBER 31, 1996 [KULDIP SINGH, M.M. PUNCHHI, N.P. SINGH, M.K. B MUKHERJEE AND SAGHIR AHMAD, JJ.] Tenancy and Land Laws : Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, C 1961: Section 18(3). Acquisition of land and its vesting free from all encumbrances in Government w.e.f date of publication of notification unde." S.18(1)- D Amendment Act 39 of 1972 which came into force w.e.f 21-12-1972 amended Sch.III of Principal Act and reduced minimum multiples for calculating compensation from 9 times to 2 times of not annual income- Noiification under S.18(3) issued on 4-4-1973 declared an extent of land of Company as surplus land and possession thereof taken over by Government-Draft Compensation Assessment Roll published on 5-12- E 1973 determined amount payable at the rate of 2 times of net annual income-Amendment Act 7 of 1974 vested surplus land in Government w.e.f date of commencement of Act i.e. 1-3-1972, instead of from date of publication of notification-Company filed writ petition before High Court challenging Draft Compensation Roll on ground that in view of Amendment Act 7 of 1974 antedating date of vesting from 4-4-1973 to 1-3-1972 it F would be entitled to compensation by applying multiple o/9 times since on 1-3-1972 Amendment Act 39 of 1972 by which compensation amount was reduced to multiple of 2 times did not come into force-Subsequently, Amendment Act 25 of 1978 came into force on 1-3-1972-It effaced and obliterated amendment introduced in S.18(3) as it stood prior to that G amendment by reiterating that date of vesting of surplus land would be date of publication notification under S.18(1 )-Held: Ss. 4, 5 and 6 of Amendment Act 7 of 1974 in Principal Act because of which it would be deemed that notification issued under S.18(1) of the Principal Act on 4-4- 1973 was valid because of said notification-Lands declared surplus vested in State under S.18(3) of Principal Act. H 193 194 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996] SUPP. 8 S.C.R. A Interpretation of Statutes: Defect in Statute-Pointed out by High Court-Removal of-By effacing and obliterating earlier amendment retrospectively-With aid of legal fiction-Validity of-Held: Amending Act had taken away th.e substratum and basis or judgment of Court-Hence, measurers adopted by B Amending Act valid. c D Legal Fiction-Mode of interpretation-Reiterated. Constitution of India, 1950: Article 14. Retrospective Legislation-Held: Legislature had power to amend, delete or obliterate a statute or provision retrospectively unless such legislative exercise was in violation of Article 14. Practice and Procedure : High Court-Orders and directions of-High Court's order, which was in nature of execution order, simply directed State Government to comply with its earlier order and direc.tion given in connected writ petition-Such earlier order set aside by Supreme Court-Held: when that earlier order itself was set aside by Supreme Court, direction given in execution order E would be of no consequence. The respondent, a public limited company, was engaged in composite and integrated activity of raising sugarcane on its land and crushing it in its sugar factory. Section 18(3) of the Tamil Nadu Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Act, 1961 provided for F acquisition of land and vesting thereof free from all encumbrances in the Government w.e.f. date of publication of notification under Section 18(1) of the Principal Act. The minimum compensation for excess land vesting in the Government was 9 times of the net annual income. When the respondent filed its return on 6-4-1972 under Section 8 of G the Principal Act it was entitled to compensation at the rate of 9 times of the net annual income. However, the Tamil Nadu Land Reforms (Fixation of Ceiling on Land) Fourth Amendment Act, 1972 (Act 39 of 1972) which came into force w.e.f 21.12.1972 amended Schedule III of the Principal Act reducing the minimum multiples for calculating compensation from 9 times to 2 times of the net annual H income. A notification under Section 18(1) of the Principal Act was .. .... STATEOFT.N. v. AROORAN SUGARS LTD. 195 published on 4-4-1973 declaring an extent of land of respondent as A " surplus land and possession thereaf taken over by Government. The Draft Compensation Ass~ssment Roll was published on 5-12-1973 determining the amount payable to the respondent in respect of
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.