SEEMA MOUR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. S. Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner and also Mr. T. Chutia, learned Junior Govt. Advocate.

(2.) The petitioner's case is that, she owns a Tata Vehicle bearing Registration No. AS-01/ 1911. The said vehicle was purchased by the petitioner by way of taking loan from the State Bank of India and the petitioner is liable to re-pay the loan in instalments with interest. Despite the aforesaid fact, the vehicle was requisitioned once in June '98 for a period of 10 days and then again in June and July '98 for 4 days and the vehicle is again requisitioned on 20.7.98 for a period of 4 days. On each of the aforesaid occasions when the vehicle was requisitioned, no notice or order U/s. 3 of the Assam Requisition and Control of Vehicle Act, 1968 was served on the petitioner. Further the petitioner has demanded a sum of Rs. 9000/- for requisition compensation, but the said amount has not been paid to the petitioner by the authorities.

(3.) Mr.Kalita, learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently argued that it has been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Hemanta Kumar Sarma & others vs State of Assam & others , reported in 1990 (2) GLJ 350 that a vehicle once requisitioned under the Assam Requisition and Control of Vehicle Act, 1968 cannot be requisitioned again unless the requisition bills for the earlier periods in respect of the said vehicle are first paid by the authorities.