HARINARAYAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is presented on behalf of Harinarayan and others under Section 11 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Im- movable Property Act, 1952 (Act No. XXX of 1952) from an award of the District Judge of Patna acting as an arbitrator under Section 8 (1) (b) of the same Act by virtue of a notification off the Government of India. The case of the appellants was that the property acquired should be valued at Rs. 18,00,000/-. But the case of the Union Government was that the value of the property was Rs. 2,47,990/-. The District Judge of Patna has accepted the case of the Government and fixed the valuation of the property at Rs. 2,47,990/- under the provisions of Section 8 (3) (b) of Act No. XXX of 1952.

(2.) Section 7 of the Act deals with the power to acquire requisitioned property, and is in the following terms:

(3.) On behalf of the appellants the learned Advocate put forward the argument that Section 8 (3) (b) has no application to this case and, therefore, the duty of the arbitrator was to fix the valuation under Section 8 (3) (a) of the Act on the oral and documentary evidence furnished by the parties. It was conceded by the learned Advocate that if we should hold that Section 8 (3) (b) of the Act applies to this case, the decision of the arbitrator was correct and there is no merit in this appeal.