BHAGABAN DAS SHAH Vs. FIRST LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This matter arises out of a petition affirmed by one Bhagaban Das Shah on 22nd April 1937 which was entitled "In the matter of an application under Section 115, Civil P.C., and under Section 107, Government of India Act, and in the matter of Bhagaban Das Shah of 169 Ahiritola Street, Calcutta, Petitioner V/s. The First Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta of 5 Bankshall Street, Calcutta, opposite party." At the outset it may be said that one is surprised to find that the petition was headed with a reference to a section of a Government of India Act which had ceased to exist. One can only imagine that the petition as regards its captions had been drafted in the old common form, that the author of the petition was extremely dubious from the very commencement as to whether Section 115, Civil P. C, would be of any assistance to him. The petition was a belated one which again raises some doubt in the mind of the Court as to whether the petitioner had any real faith in his own case. It was endorsed by an officer of the Court as having been moved on 30 April, 1937, presumably in order to save limitation, for, the petition was directed against an order made by the First Land Acquisition Collector, Calcutta dated 1 February 1937. The prayer in the petition upon which that order was made was to this effect: Your petitioner prays that your Honour may be pleased to refer the matter to the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal in the above terms.

(2.) The "above terms" were these: 1. That your petitioner is dissatisfied with the award of valuation in the above case and begs that the matter be referred to the Calcutta Improvement Tribunal under Section 18, Land Acquisition Act for a proper determination of the amount of compensation payable to your petitioner on account of loss of earnings, damages to business and costs of removal. 2. That your petitioner has got an extensive and well established business in the above premises and has also got an Electric Dal Mill in a portion of the adjoining premises No. 107 Ahiritola Street which is held by your petitioner under a lease having 6 years to run.

(3.) That a sum of Rs. 7,500(Rupees seven thousand and five hundred) ought to have been awarded in favour of your petitioner on account of damages to business, loss of earnings and costs of removal in consequence of the acquisition of the above premises. 3. The "above premises" are described as being No. 9 Ahiritola 2nd Lane. It appears that the petitioner was the owner of a business or (possibly, in a sense, two businesses) carried on in the adjoining premises being No. 107 Ahiritola Street as well as in No. 9 Ahiritola 2nd Lane, An award had been made whereby in respect of premises No. 107 compensation was allowed under the heads of "Machinery," "Statutory Allowance" "Removal" and "Loss of earnings". There was also an award in respect of premises No. 9 in this form: