Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1974 (10) TMI 100

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... till 1962 when she sold this property to the sons of respondent No. 1 and one Mrs. Jain. On 24-6- 1949 the, United Provinces Administration of Evacuee Property Ordinance, 1949 came into force. This would be a proper stage at which the relevant provisions of the Ordinance should be noticed. Under that Ordinance evacuee property means any property in which an evacuee has any right or interest, or which is held by him under any deed of trust or other instrument, and an unauthorised person means any person (whether empowered in this behalf by the evacuee or otherwise) who, after the 15th day of August, 1947, has been occupying, supervising or managing the property of an evacuee without the approval of the Custodian. Under section 5 of that .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a Division Bench of the High Court allowed the respondents' appeal. This appeal has been filed on the basis of a certificate granted by the High Court. The learned Single Judge took the view that Mrs. Naqvi was an evacuee because she had left Uttar Pradesh after the 1st day of March, 1947 to a place outside the territories of India. The Assistant Custodian General had also taken a similar view when the revision petition was filed by 1st respondent before him. The Division Bench on the other hand took the view that as Mrs. Nacivi had not left the United Provinces on or after 1st March, 1947 but her husband had been posted in Teheran since some time in 1942 and she had migrated to Pakistan from Teheran after 1st March, 1947 it would not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tion filed before the Assistant Custodian General by the 1st respondent also it is admitted that Mrs. Naqvi migrated to Pakistan from Teheran as was held by the Assistant Custodian. Therefore, merely because in his order in revision the Assistant Custodian General had relied upon section 2(c)(i) to hold that Mrs. Naqvi was an evacuee that cannot prevent the consideration of the fact whether she was an evacuee under section 2(c)(ii). There can be no doubt that she was an evacuee within the meaning of that word under section 2(c)(ii) and the property in question was an evacuee property. The property automatically vested in the Custodian by virtue of the provision of section 5 of the United provinces Ordinance No. 1 of 1949. The U. P. Ordi .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erned, such as the Ministry of Pensions, before they gave him the assurance. He was entitled to assume that the board of medical officers who examined him were recognised by the Minister of Pensions for the purpose of giving certificates as to attributability. Can it be seriously suggested that, having got that assurance, he was not entitled to rely on it In my, opinion if a government department in its dealings with a subject takes it upon itself to assume authority upon a matter with which he is concerned, he is entitled to rely upon having the authority which it assumes. He does not know, and cannot be expected to know, the limits of its authority. The department itself is clearly bound, and as it is but an agent for the Crown, It binds .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ask of the citizen who is anxious to walk in the narrow way; but that does not justify a different answer being given. Lord Normand in dealing with this question observed at page 849 after referring to the statement of law by Lord Denning: As I understand this statement, the respondents were, in the opinion of the learned Lord Justice, entitled to say that the Crown was barred by representations made by Mr. Thompson and acted on by them from alleging against them a breach of the statutory order, and further that the respondents were equally entitled to say in a question with the appellant that there had been no breach. But it is certain that neither a minister nor any subordinate officer of the Crown can by any conduct or represen- .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates