LexWEST BENGAL STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION versus M/S. INDRAPURI STUDIO PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[201 OJ 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. 689 WEST BENGAL STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION A V. M/S. INDRAPURI STUDIO PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER (Civil Appeal No.3865 of 2006) OCTOBER 19, 2010 . , [G.5. SINGHVI AND DR. B.S. CHAUHAN, JJ.) B West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control Act, 1947 - ss. 11 (1 )(f) and 2(d) - Premises belonging to respondent No. 1 requisitioned by State Government and C transferred to appellant - Compensation payable to resrondent no. 1 not fixed by agreement - Arbitrator, appointed for determination of compensation, passed award - Appellant filed appeal challenging the award - High Court declined to entertain the appeal holding that appellant was not D a 'person interested' in the compensation payable on account of requisition of the premises - Held: A person for whose benefit the premises are requisitioned or to whom the requisitioned premises are transferred does not have any locus to participate in the process of determination of E compensation by agreement, or in the matter of appointment of an Arbitrator or reference of case to the Arbitrator or nomination of an assessor -:-- A person like the appellant can neither submit opinion u/s.11(1)(d) as to the fair amount of compensation nor the Arbitrator is obliged to give notice and F opportunity of hearing to such person uls.11(1)(e) rlw s.12(a), (b) or (c) - The appellant is neither entitled to copy of the arbitral award as of right nor can he challenge the award by filing an appeal u/ s. 11 (1 )(f) - The definition of the expression 'person interested' as contained in s.2(d) is exhaustive - G Appellant is not covered by the said definition and, as such, its appeal was rightly dismissed by the High Court as not maintainable - West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control Rules, 1947 - rr.7-10, 13 and 15. 689 H 690 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2010] 13 (ADDL.) S.C.R. A Interpretation of Statutes - Definition clause - Inclusive definition and exhaustive definition - Difference elucidated. The premises belonging to respondent no.1 was requisitioned by the State Government under Section 3 8 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control Act, 1947. After taking possession of the requisitioned premises, the State Government transferred the same to the appellant. Since the amount of compensation payable to respondent no.1 in lieu of the requisition of its property could not be fixed by agreement, the State Government C appointed an Arbitrator under Section 11 (1 )(b) of the Act. The Arbitrator passed the award under Section 11 (1 )(e) of the Act. Aggrieved, the appellant filed an appeal under Section 11 (1 )(f). The Division Bench of the High D Court, however, declined to entertain the appeal holding that the appellant was not a 'person interested' in the compensation payable on account of requisition of the premises in quetsion and did not have the right to participate in the arbitration proceedings or file an appeal E against the arbitral award. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD:1.1. From an analysis of Sections 2(d), 3(1), 6, 11, 12 and 13 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition F and Control Act, 1947 and Rules 7, 8, 9, 10, 13 and 15 of the West Bengal Premises Requisition and Control Rules, 1947, it is clear that neither at the stage of fixing the amount of compensation by agreement nor at the time of appointment of Arbitrator, the State Government is G required to consult any person including beneficiary of the requisition. The only person with whom the State Government is required to negotiate the amount of , compensation is the one whose premises are requisitioned. An application for reference of the case to H the Arbitrator can be made only by a person who was a WEST 81::.NGAL STATE WAREHOUSING CORPN. v. 691 INDRAPURI STUDIO PVT. LTD. party to the unsuccessful exercise undertaken for fixing the amount of compensation by agreement. If the State Governm~nt nominates a person having expert knowledge as to the nature of the requisitioned premises to assist th~ Arbitrator, a corresponding right is available to the person whose premises are requisitioned to nominate an assessor. In terms of Section 11 (1 )(d), only A B the State Government and the person to be compensated have the right to state their respective opinions as to the fair amount of compensation. The person to whom the requisitioned premises are transferred has no role in any c on6 of these matters. The use o
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.