Saving proviso cannot defeat appellate remedy for compensation after statutory deemed continuation of requisition

A saving proviso preserving determinations and awards made for the pre-10 January 1968 period could not be read to extinguish the statutory appeal under Section 11 for compensation relating to the period after that date. Once the requisition was deemed to continue under the later Act, the compensation for the post-10 January 1968 period became subject to the appellate remedy provided by that Act. The objection to maintainability therefore succeeded only for the earlier period and failed for the later period, so the challenge was maintainable in part and the matter was remitted for merits on the post-10 January 1968 compensation claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether, on the substitution of Section 25 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, an appeal lay under Section 11 against the award of compensation made under the Defence of India Act, 1962, for the period after 10 January 1968.

Analysis: Section 25(1) deemed requisitions continuing beyond 10 January 1968 under the Defence of India Act to be requisitions under the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952, and made all provisions of that Act applicable. The proviso saved determinations and awards already in force in respect of the pre-10 January 1968 period, but that saving could not be read so widely as to exclude the appellate remedy under Section 11 for compensation relating to the post-10 January 1968 period. The earlier determination under the Defence of India Act remained effective for the past period, but once the requisition was statutorily deemed to continue under the later Act, the compensation applicable thereafter became subject to appeal under that Act.

Conclusion: The objection to maintainability succeeded only for the period prior to 10 January 1968 and failed for the period thereafter. The appeals were maintainable in part.

Final Conclusion: The appeals were allowed in part, the High Court's dismissal was set aside to the extent it treated the challenge as wholly incompetent, and the matters were remitted for disposal on merits insofar as the post-10 January 1968 compensation period was concerned.

Ratio Decidendi: A saving proviso preserving pre-existing determinations cannot be construed to destroy an appellate right conferred by a later statute in respect of the period for which the requisition is deemed to continue under that later statute.

---