1996 Supp 9 SCR 570 The following Order of the Court was delivered This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Delhi High Court, made on August 1, 1985 dismissing the writ petition on the ground that the companyclusion reached and the findings recorded by the authorities under the Displaced Persons Compensation and Rehabilitation Act, 1954, 44 of 1954 for short, the Act are a question of fact and exercising the power under Article 226 of the Constitution companyld number be reopened by the Court.
They filed their application under Section 4 of the Act on December 19, 1955 claiming rehabilitation company pensation under the Act.
Their father died some time in the last week of April 1955 in Pakistan.
4 and 5, Khushi Ram Sippy and Narain Dutt Sippy, was a resident of Nawabshah in West Pakistan.
While the father and one of his brothers remained in Pakistan, after the partition of India domain into Pakistan and India, the said respondents migrated in 1947 to India.
In lieu thereof, the authorities at different stages verified the claims and found them entitled to the companypensation and companysequentially the land in possession of the appellant was allotted to them.
With a view to find out whether the companyclusion reached by the learned Judges is companyrect in law, it is necessary to state the material facts.
One Chandu Mal Sippy, father of respondent Nos.
The appellant had challenged in the proceedings before the authorities under the Act but was unsuccessful.
