Skip to content


Naresh Chandra Bose Vs. Hira Lal Bose and ors. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtKolkata
Decided On
Judge
Reported in34Ind.Cas.263
AppellantNaresh Chandra Bose
RespondentHira Lal Bose and ors.
Cases ReferredGolap Coomary Dossee v. Soondur Narain Deo
Excerpt:
calcutta improvement act (v b.c. of 1911), section 71 - land acquisition act (i of 1894), section 53--special tribunal, power of, to call for records of other courts. - .....perfectly clear that some modus operandi must be devised by which the tribunal may have access to land acquisition and other records that are necessary for the purpose of their business. but there appeared to be technical difficulties under the law. we, therefore, asked the learned government pleader, babu ram churn mitter, to give us his assistance in the matter, and we have also heard the learned vakil babu mohendra nath roy for the petitioner, and it appears to us fairly clear that in the exercise of oar powers of supervision under the charter, we ought to give directions to the lower court in the same way in which a bench of this court appears to have done in the case of golap coomary dossee v. soondur narain deo 4 c.l.r. 36. there the court also dealt with administrative orders of.....
Judgment:

1. The question that is raised in this Rule is one of considerable importance to the public having dealings with the Special Tribunal constituted to hear cases from the orders of the Calcutta Improvement Trust. It is perfectly clear that some modus operandi must be devised by which the Tribunal may have access to land acquisition and other records that are necessary for the purpose of their business. But there appeared to be technical difficulties under the law. We, therefore, asked the learned Government Pleader, Babu Ram Churn Mitter, to give us his assistance in the matter, and we have also heard the learned Vakil Babu Mohendra Nath Roy for the petitioner, and it appears to us fairly clear that in the exercise of oar powers of supervision under the Charter, we ought to give directions to the lower Court in the same way in which a Bench of this Court appears to have done in the case of Golap Coomary Dossee v. Soondur Narain Deo 4 C.L.R. 36. There the Court also dealt with administrative orders of this Court. Now as the shortest way to get over the difficulty, we may point out that the Special Tribunal has been constituted a Court under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and under Section 53 of that Act the Land Acquisition Court is governed by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure and has the powers of a Judge under that Code. It is not necessary to follow the learned Judge in the Court below to the extent of holding that the Special Tribunal would be able to compel the production of records from another Court. It is this power of compulsion which seems to have been a stumbling block in the learned Judge's mind. Nobody ever heard of an attempt to compel a Court to send its records to another Court, and we are not apprehensive that any such question will ever arise. The power to call for records is a power which is undoubtedly inherent in the Judge of a Land Acquisition Court and consequently in the Special Tribunal.

2. For these reasons we think that the Rule should be made absolute and the District Judge should be directed to send the record asked for by the President of the Tribunal.

3. We make no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //