LexTHE BIHARI MILLS AND ANOTHER versus THE AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
.. ' - 2 s.c.R.. SUPREME COURT REPORTS THE BIHARI MILLS AND ANOTHER v. THE AHMEDABAD MUNICIPAL CORPORATION (B. P. SINHA C. J., J. C. SHAH and N. RAJAGOPALA AYYANGARJJ.) 915 Appeal-Order by 0 fficer under statute-Statute providing for appeal to .authority specified-Statute repealed-New statute •ubslituting new officer and new appellate authority-Order under old· statute-If appealable to authority under new statute- Bombay Town Planning Act, 1915 (Bom. I of 1915). Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 (Bom. 27 of 1955), s. 90. In 1942, a scheme was sanctioned under the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1915, for an area under the Ahmedab~d Municipal Borough. The Arbitrator appointed under the 1915 Act finalised the scheme. From July I, 1950, the Borough was converted into the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation. The 1915 Act was repealed by the Bombay Town Planning Act 1954, with effect from April 1, 1957. On March 28, 1958, the Arbitrator passed certain orders affecting the appellants. Against the decisions of the Arbitrator the appellants preferred appeals before the Board of appeal set up under the Act. The question was whether· the appeals were competent. Held that no appeal lay from the order of the Arbitrator appointed under the 1915 Act to the Board of Appeal .et up under the 1954 Act. Under the 1915 Act an appeal lay from an order of the Arbitrator to the Tribunal of Arbitration. In the 1954 Act the Arbitrator was substituted by a Town Planning Officer and the Tribunal of Arbitration by Board of Appeal. The saving clause ins. 90 of the 1954 Act continued the appointment of the Arbitrator made undrr the 1915 Act and also kept alive the proceedings before him, but it did not provide for the continuance of the Tribunal of Arbitration. . The Arbitrator did not become a Town Planning Officer and his decision or order did not have the effect of an order by the Town Planning Officer so as to become appealable . to the Board of appeal. 1963 Api;J 9 J96J lliMIMiUs •• ~Mutrici· ,. C«/>Or•liOft SIW C. J. 916 SUPREMt COURT REPORTS (1964) VOL. CIVIL APPlilLLATK JURISDICTION : Civil Appeals Nos. 133 and 134 of 1962. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 23, 195!) of the Board of Appeal constituted under the Bombay Town· Plauning Act No. 27 of 1955 in Tribunal Appeals Nos. 140-47of1958. G. B. Pai, J. B. Dadachanji, 0. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellants. S. 'I'. Desai and I. N. Shroff, for the respondents: 1903. April 9. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SINHA C. ].-These two consolidated appeals, by special leave, raise the question of the interpretation of certain provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Act, 1954 (Bombay XXVII of 1955) which herein- after will be referred to as the· Act, with particular reference to the scope and effect of s. 90 of the Act, whereby the Bombay Town P.lanning Act (Bombay I of l\Jl5) was repealed, and certain orders of the State Government saved from the effect of the repeal. It appears that the Ahmedabad Municipal Borough, which was replaced by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation-the sole respondent in these appeals and which hereinafter will be referred to as the Borough and the Corporation respectively· -- ·declared its intention by a resolution dated October l, 1941, to promulgate a scheme under the Act of 1915 in respect of the area known ·as Khokhara-- Mohmedabad. The said Scheme was in due course sanctioned by the Government of Born.bay on July 14, 1942. Under that Act an arbitrator was appointed in respect of the said Scheme, as required ,_ ' _ • 2 S.C.R. SUPREME COURT REPORTS IH 7 under the Act. Shri R. N. Parikh was eventually appointed the Arbitrator under the Act. He finalised the Scheme under the Act of 1915. The Borough was converted into the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation under the Bombay Provincial Municipal Corporation Act of 1949 with effect from July 1, 1950. The Act of 1915 was repealed by the Act which came into force from April 1, 1957. The said Arbitrator notified to the appellants a memo- randum dated March 23, 1958, extracting his decision in respect of the said Scheme, in so far as it affected the appellants. The Government of Bombay constituted a Bo.ird of Appeal under the Act, consisting of three persons whom it is not necessary to specify. The appellants filed two appeals against the award of the said Arbitrato
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.