The High Court partly allowed both the appeals.
Colony, Rampur rented to outsiders who are number companynected with the scheduled undertaking.
For appreciating that question para 10 needs to be quoted in full That M s Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. have following assets and business other than the Sugar Undertaking.
Buland factory building including godowns residential accommodation and carbide buildings and lands appurtenant thereto.
On companying into force of the U.P. Sugar Undertakings Acquisition Ordinance in short the Ordinance later on became Act number33 of 1971 hereinafter referred to as the Act .
The suit was decreed for possession in respect of properties mentioned at Item Nos.
The defendants Corporation filed First Appeal No.265/1989 against part of the decree whereby First Appeal 949/1988 was filed by the plaintiffs Raza Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. whereby part of the decree dismissing the suit was challenged.
Hari Bhawan and land appurtenant thereto.
It was alleged that the plaintiffs were entitled to take possession of such property which is number companyered by the expression scheduled undertaking.
Electrical installations, typewriter, furniture, fittings calculations and other things belonging to the registered office of the companypany as per the balance sheet of the companypany of the year 1978.
The first appeal was partly allowed in respect of shops at Nainital Road alongwith land appurtenant to it as referred to in para 10 of the plaint.
In the year 1968 Jhunjhunwalas purchased the companypany from Dalmias.
1 and its subsidiary companypany including its Secretarys residence Bungalow No.
1.11.1979.
The cross appeals were filed against the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court on 18.8.1988 partly decreeing the suit in respect of certain properties involved in the suit while dismissing the suit in relation to other properties.
Maize companyony including quarters and land appurtenant thereto.
In both the appeals the issues relates to the question as to which items in para 10 of the plaint are companyered by the Act.
The trial Court framed various issues.
R.A. 1, situated near the Central Office, Civil Lines, Rampur and also the offices of Director, Secretary and Administrative Manager and share department situated in the Central Office, Civil Lines, Rampur.
As numbered above, both the plaintiffs and defendants filed appeals.
The stand of the defendants in the written statement was that all the properties mentioned in para 10 of the plaint are companyered by the expression scheduled undertaking.
It held that the properties mentioned at Item Nos.3 and 6 in para 10 are number companyered by the expression scheduled undertaking and therefore passed the decree for possession of such properties against the defendants.
The managerial set up of Plaintiff No.
Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. These appeals arise out of a companymon judgment of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the two appeals, one by U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd. and other by Raja Buland Sugar Co. Ltd. and Ors.
Suit No.28 of 1979 was filed by the plaintiffs against the defendants i.e. Corporation and others for permanent injunction restraining them from interfering in any manner in the possession and management of affairs and business and assets of the registered office of the companypany as detailed in para 10 of the plaint and further sought declaration that the properties mentioned in para 10 of the plaint are outside the purview of the Ordinance and the Act and defendants Nos.
It was held that the suit in respect of Maize companyony referred to in para 10 of the plaint as Item No.3 stood dismissed.
The Central Government rescinded the aforesaid order w.e.f.
Plaintiffs during the pendency of the suit got the plaint amended by adding the relief that if the companyrt companyes to the companyclusion that the defendants were in possession of all or any of the items mentioned in para 10 of the plaint, a decree for possession be passed in favour of the plaintiffs.
Nursery land, equipments and livestock, crops etc.
4 and 6 in para 10 of the plaint.
It took the further plea that the suit was barred by res judicata as the writ petition filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed by the High Court and the suit was barred by section 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in short the Specific Relief Act as the plaintiffs have number sought for other companysequential relief in the suit.
Residential quarters alongwith land appurtenant thereto situated in Govan.
Shops at Nainital Road alongwith land of playgrounds.
In the year 1978, the Sugar Undertakings Taking Over of Management Act, 1978 in short the Taking Over Act came into force.
The factual background in a nutshell is as follows Prior to 1946 there were two independent companypanies namely, Raja Sugar Company and Buland Sugar Company.
The suit was based on the allegations that the properties mentioned in para 10 of the plaint are number companyered by the definition of scheduled undertaking as defined in clause h of Section 2 of the Act.
Jai Bhawan and land appurtenant thereto.
It provided for appointment of Authorized Controller to manage the sugar factories.
M s Govan Bros. were its Managing Agents.
It was held that the suit was number barred by Section 34 of the Specific Relief Act and the suit was accordingly decreed partly.
The High Court stayed the operation of the Ordinance on 5.7.1971 and also directed restoration of the status quo ante on 2.7.1971.
The High Court was of the view that the only question was whether the properties in dispute as specified in para 10 of the plaint stand vested in the Corporation in accordance with Sections 3 and 2 h of the Act.
4 and 5 were number entitled to the possession of those properties.
The possession of the undertakings was taken over by the Authorized Controller on 30th October, 1979.
In the year 1946 the Dalmias purchased it from M s Govan Brothers.
Both the companypanies were amalgamated in the year 1957 and one companypany under the name of Raza Buland Sugar Company Ltd. came into existence.
Temple land including companystruction thereof situated on Nainital Road, Civil Lines, Rampur.
The plaintiffs filed a Writ Petition No.4130 of 1971 challenging the validity of the Ordinance.
The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the plaintiffs on 3.5.1979.
Light railway land and equipment like locomotives, trollies, rails and other material which are in the use of sugar undertaking since a long time.
