UNION OF INDIA Vs. AMIN CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) H. Gulam Mohi-ud-Din was the owner of the site of the cinema house known as Railto Cinema, Amritsar. He leased it out to one Nanak Chand for a period of 15 years under the registered lease-deed dated Nov. 13, 1934. Nanak Chand transferred his leasehold rights to Messrs. Amin Chand Tara Chand respondent. H. Gulam Mohi-ud-Din constructed the cinema buildings over the site and accepted the respondent as a lessee under the terms and conditions contained in a subsequent lease-deed dt. May 7, 1936. On the migration of H. Gulam Mohi-ud-Din to Pakistan, the rights in the cinema vested in the Custodian as evacuee property. The respondent remained in occupation of the cinema premises till Dec. 31, 1957. According to the respondent, the cinema building suffered damage on account of floods during the lease period and it was subjected to extensive repairs at their cost under intimation to the Custodian authorities. In 1954, the respondent lodged a claim with the District Rent and Managing Officer, Amritsar, claiming Rs. 27,034/-/6 having been spent on the repairs of the cinema building from time to time after the partition of the country and a sum of Rs. 6,687/9/-as cost of replacement of old electric wiring etc. The claim of the respondent was looked into by the Assistant Settlement Commissioner, Jullundur, who, vide his order dated Sept 6, 1957, found that the respondent was entitled to the reimbursement of Rs. 7,481/- on account of repairs. The claim for reimbursement for replacement of old electric wiring etc. was rejected. The respondent feeling dissatisfied with the order of the Assistant Settlement Commissioner preferred an appeal which was decided by the Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner vide order dated May 17, 1958. The Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner remanded the case of a fresh decision. The Assistant Settlement Commissioner again decided the case and vide order dated Nov. 23, 1960, allowed Rupees 9,905/12/- as cost of repairs and disallowed the remaining claim. The respondent again feeling dissatisfied with the order of the Assistant Settlement Commissioner preferred an appeal which was decided by another Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner vide order dated Nov. 21, 1961. The Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner accepted the appeal and allowed full claim of the respondent, that is, Rs. 27,034/- /6 as cost of repairs and Rs. 6,687/9/-as cost of replacement of old electric wiring. The respondent was not made payment in terms of the order of the Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner dated Nov. 21, 1961 in spite of repeated demands. The Joint Chief Settlement Commissioner with the delegated powers of Central Government under Section 33 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, (hereinafter the Act) vide order dated July 10, 1967, set aside the order of the Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner dated Nov. 21, 1961 after hearing the respondent and further remanded the case to the Authorised Chief Settlement Commissioner for a fresh decision. The operative part of the order of the Joint Chief Settlement Commissioner reads :--

(2.) The respondent assailed the order of the Joint Chief Settlement Commissioner dated July 10, 1967, in Civil Writ Petn, No. 2143 of 1967, which has been accepted vide order dated April 11, 1979. It is against this order that the present Letters Patent Appeal is directed.

(3.) Railto Cinema, Amritsar, was leased out to Messrs, Amin Chand Tara Chand vide lease-deed dated May 27, 1936. The respondent remained in occupation of the cinema till Dec. 31, 1957. The relevant terms of the lease-deed dated May 27, 1936, are as below :-