P L D 1971 Lahore 931 (PLP)

Apart from this the rule generally adopted in construing such legislation giving general protection pro bono publico is to prefer the construction which will add force to the protection tend suppress subtle inventions and evasions". This observation of their Lordships applies to the present case with full force. No notice having been served upon either of them, the condition precedent for cancellation of the transfer was not fulfilled and the order of cancellation was, therefore, devoid of all lawful authority.

11. It is only after a valid cancellation of the transfer that according to paragraph 4 of the aforesaid Scheme "the property will be available for disposal as hereinafter provided". The property, therefore, did not become available for transfer in the circumstances of this case.

12. Disposal of available property is dealt with in Chapter

3. The subsequent auction of the property in dispute was also, therefore, without any legal basis and this petition can be accepted on this score alone.

13. That is, however, not all. The property was transferred to the petitioner's father under paragraph No. 15 (3) of the Schedule to the Act. This paragraph deals with the transfer of an industrial concern to a displaced person or local who is in occupation of it, and the same has under this sub‑paragraph to "be transferred to him on payment of its prevailing market value minus the investment, made, if any". The other sub‑paragraphs of paragraph 15 are differently worded. In so far as in the case of a person covered by those paragraphs, the property has to be "transferred to him on payment immediately of the prevailing market value minus the investment made, if any". It is, therefore, clear that the transferees under sub‑paragraphs 2 and 4 have to pay the prevailing market value of the property immedi ately while the rigor of immediate payment is not inflicted upon a transferee under sub‑paragraph

3. And, of course, the petitioner belongs to the latter category.

14. Paragraph 21 provides that a claimant to whom any property is transferred under this Act shall pay the amount due from him after adjustment of the total amount of deferred payment admissible to him as follows (i) . . . . . . . . . . . . (ii) if the property is transferred to him on payment of the prevailing market value within three years in equal monthly installments, unless such payment is required under the other provisions of the Act to be made immediately. In the present case the petitioner or his father, while he lived was never sent any intimation as to how much money was due from them after the adjustment of the deferred payment admissible to them. It should have been finally calculated by adding rent and subtracting public dues by the Settlement Department when as in the present case, they received the Compensation Book from the transferee. After the calculation and adjustment of this amount the transferee had to be informed of the amount due from him and the amount of each installment that he was required to pay. No such thing was ever done by the Depart ment and even when notices were issued to a dead man, I.e. 1vlehn#a deceased, the full amount of Rs. 22,735 was always demanded without making any adjustment. In the notice referred to above, the columns pertaining to the adjustment of deferred payment, the amount of each installment and the time when each installment fell due were all left blank. Not having been ever told how to pay when to pay and how much to pay, the transferee or his legal representatives could not be saddled with the liability for non‑payment.

15. My conclusions, therefore, are that‑ (1) In the case of industrial concerns transferred unde paragraph 15 (3) of the Schedule to the Displaced Persons (Compensation and Rehabilitation) Act, 1958, it is the duty of the Department to compute the prevailing market value of the property, to calculate the amount of investment made by the transferee in It and accepted by the Department and then to arrive at the sale‑price by deducting the latter from the former; (2) because the transferee under paragraph No. 15 (3) has to be a Claimant, it is the further duty of the Department to adjust the total amount of deferred payment admissible to the transferee against the aforesaid sale‑price ; (3) it is the duty of the Department to then distribute the sale‑price over 36 equal installments ; (4) it is the duty of the Department to intimate to the transferee the result of the calculations referred to above and he should be notified of the amount thus found due from him and the amount of each installment that he is required to pay. Unless these steps are taken, n3n‑payment of the transfer price by the transferee cannot be used to dub him as having "failed to pay two consecutive installments" or to have "defaulted in payment of transfer price". (5) No notice under paragraph 2 of Scheme No. VIII can be served upon the transferee unless the aforementioned steps have been taken; (6) the notice under Scheme No. VIII has to be served upon the transferee or his legal representatives and unless the notice is so served, the property will not be "available for disposal" under paragraph 4 of the Scheme No. VIII; (7) the amount of deferred payment not having been adjusted and the total amount due not having been worked out, the amount of each installment not having been calculated and no intimation in respect of any of them having ever been given to the legal representatives of the deceased transferee, they could not be saddled with the responsibility for non‑payment ; (8) notices of demand having been sent to a dead man were no notices in the eye of law and the provisions of paragraph No. 2 of Chapter II of Scheme Vill having thus not been complied with, the cancellation of the transfer of . the property under paragraph 3 was without lawful authority ; (9) there being no lawful cancellation of the transfer, the property did not become available for disposal under the Scheme in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 4; (10) the property not being available for disposal under the Scheme, its purported transfer by way of negotiation to Allah Ditta respondent was devoid of all lawful authority and was of no legal effect.

16. This petition is, therefore, accepted, the impugned cancellation of the transfer of the property as well as its transfer to Allah Ditta are declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. Since, however, Allah Ditta is not responsible for the auction of the property, he shall not be saddled with the costs of this petition. The Settlement Depart ment shall pay costs both to the petitioner and to Allah Ditta respondent. The same are fixed at a sum of Rs. 500 (Rupees five hundred only) @ in each case. K. B. A. Petition accepted.