Case Details

Citation(s)
1966 SLG 98 1966 SLD 98 1966 PLD 723
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 26-D of 1966, decision dated: 3rd May 1966.
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J. AND FAZLE-AKBAR, J
Asrarul Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court (W. Mirza, Advocate Supreme Court with him), instructed by Q. A. Rahman Attorney. Abdur Rahman Chowdhury, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by A.W. Mian, Senior Attorney.

PAKISTAN OXYGEN LTD.

VS

(1) THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN THROUGH SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT AND (2) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, KHULNA

Law:

Section:

East Bengal (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act (XIII of 1948), S. 7 (aaa) (i)-Requiring bodies not "person interested" and do not come into picture at time of assessment of compensation ­Section 7 (aaa) (i) does not apply to such bodies, and they are not entitled to apply to Government asking for appointment of an arbitrator in matter of assessment. JUDGMENT FAZL-E-AKEAR, J.-The only question raised in this petition for special leave to appeal is: Whether the petitioner is an "interested person" within the meaning of section 7 (aaa) (i) of the East Bengal (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948 and it arises under the following circumstances: At the instance of the petitioner, the Pakistan Oxygen Limited, the Deputy Commissioner, Khulna requisitioned 5 acres of land for the purpose of establishment of an industrial undertaking for the manufacture of oxygen and dissolved acetylene. The petitioner-Company thereafter deposited a sum of Rs. 1,19,101.39 on the basis of a provisional assessment of the valuation of the land and the constructions thereon. On the final valuation of the said land and structures the petitioner was directed to deposit an additional sum of Rs. 87,000. On receipt of the said intimation they wrote to the Government that the question of assessment may be referred to an Arbitrator under section 7 (aaa) of the East Bengal (Emergency) Requisition of Property Act, 1948. On 22nd July 1965 the department concerned wrote to them that the "Requiring Bodies are not entitled to apply for appointment of an Arbitrator under section 7 (aaa) of the above-noted Act in the matter of an estimate of the L. A. Cost prepared by the D. C. under the above Act". The petitioner then filed a petition in the High Court under Article 93 of the Constitution for cancellation of the above letter dated 22nd July 1965, and for referring the matter to an Arbitrator in terms of the Act. The learned Judges while dismissing the petition observed: "The question of payment of compensation has to be resolved between the Provincial Government or its representa­tive the Deputy Commissioner and the persons who are entitled to compensation. The requiring body does not come…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492