LexTHE UNION OF INDIA versus RAM KANWAR AND OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
•
.. ii'--
3 S.C.R.
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
313
THE UNION OF INDIA
v.
RAM KANWAR AND OTHERS
(P. B. GA.TENDRAGADKAR, K. SuBBA RAO and
M. HrnAYATULLAH, JJ.)
Letters Patent Appeal-Limitation for filing-Requi"ition
and de-Requi,,;tion of building-Indian Limitation Act, 1908
(.9 of 1908), s.2.9 (2) Art. 157-Punjab High Court Rules, r. ~
D~fence of India Rules, r. 75A-Requisitioning and Acquisitwn-
ing qf Jmmorable Property Act, 1952 (30 of 19.52), u, 3, 24 (2)-
Tlequisitioned Land
(Continuance
ef
Powers)
Act,
1947
(XVII of 1947).
A building belonging to the respondents was requisitioned
by the Government of India
under r. 75-A (1)
of the
Defence of India Rules originally for the purpose of occu-
pation by a certain officer of the Indian National Air\.vays
and afterwards by the officers of the Central Government.
After the building was vacated by the said officers it was put in
the po'5ession of Tribeni Kala Sangam which was a private
dance and music school. The respondent's appeal to the
Central Government for de-requisitioning the building having
failed he filed a petition for mandamus for that purpose in the .
High Court which was allowed. The appellant's appeal under
the Letters Patent filed within 30 days under the rules of the
High Court but beyond 20 days as prescribed by the Limi-
tation Act from the judgment of the single Judge was dismissed
a s barred by time and also on the merits. On appeal by
special leave.
Held, that r. 4 of the High Court Rules which allows
Letters Patent appeals to be filed within 30 days from the
date of the judgment of the single Judge is a special law within
the meaning of s.29(2) of the Limitation Act and such appeals
may be filed within the said period of 30 days and not 20 days
as prescribed by Art. 151 of the First Schedule of the Limi-
tation Act.
Punjab Co-operativt Bank Ltd.
v. Official Liquidator.,
A.LR. 1941 Lah. 57, approved.
Held, further, that under s.24(2) of the Requisitioning and
Acquisitioning of Immovable Property Act, 1952, which repealed
the Requisitioned Land (Continuance of Powers) Act, 1947,
a fiction was created to the effect that properties requisitioned
under the earlier Act should be deemed to be requisitioned
under s.3 of the Act. The effect of the fiction was that the
requisition made under r. 75-A of the Defence of India Rules
was a requisition under s.3 of the 1952 Act, that is, the
1961
Augu•t 29.
1161
fht Union of l1rli l
v.
T:ain Kanwar
StAbba Rao J.
:ll4
SUPRE:\fE COURT REPORTS
(1062)
purpose mentioned in r. 7j-A shall be deemed to be a publi~ •
purpose of the Union ,,·ithin the n1eaning of s.3 of the ,\c~
In the present ca:;c as the building i11 qucstipn \\'ac; being use(l
for a purpose other than that for ,,·hich it \vas originallv
requisitioned u11drr r. 75-A it \\·as liable to he de-requisitioned'.
CrnL APPELLATE .JnusJ>J('TIOX: ri\·il Appeal
X o. 3::::? of I !JGO.
Appeal by 8]>C('ial lean' from tlw jwlgmcnt
11.ml order dater! Ko\·cmbcr :!I, ]\);)i, of the Punjab-.t
High Court (Cin.'uit He11d1) at ll<'lhi in L.P.A. ~o. J
of 1955.
JI. C. Sr:/1tlnvl,
Atloo,r<y·I•'< nu11l of Inrlin,
R. SP.n, H. II. /)fte/mr and '/' . .ll. Sr-u, for the
appellant.
A. r. J'is1rmu1tlw S"slr·i a111l S1ml<1r TJril1ri1!1tr,
for the responrlents Xos. l to (i.
~
S. X. Andley, Rt1nw.,lwr1r Xath an<! T'.L !'ohm,
for the respondm1t Xo. 7.
l!JGI. August :!!l. The Juclgment of the Court
was clelh'<'rcd 1.Jy
SuBBA H..1.0, J.-This appeal by spceial leave
is preferred against the judgment of a division lwnch
of tho Circuit Benrh oft.he Punjab High Court at 4t
Delhi confirming that of a single ,Judge of that
High Court i.isuing a writ of mnnrlam·us against the
Union of India dii:ecting it to rc$tore possession of
the flat requisitionrd by the s11icl Government to
the respondents.
Ono Ba.bu ltam was the owner of Flat No. 5,
Aggarwal Building, Connaught Circus, New Delhi;•
respondents l to u are hiA sons and widow.
By ari""'
order dated April 14, HJ43, the Government of
India requisitioned the said flat under r.iii-A(I) of
tho Def en co of India Rules for a period of one year
from April 15,
19~3 to April l·I, 19-14.
The saicl
flat was put in tho occupation of one Hardie of the
Indian National Airways.
The period of requisi-
tion was extended from time to time, ancl fmally
1.Jy an order dated April 2, 1946, the flat was requi~ •
sitioncd from April 15, 1!!46, until further orders
r
•
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.