9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (10) TMI 575 - HC - VAT and Sales TaxAuction of immovable property - dispute of VAT Authorities of unpaid dues - HELD THAT - As is well settled in law no such sale even if through public auction would abridge or in any manner terminate the existing lease. If therefore the HPCL claims to be a lesseee of the original owner the auction purchaser it would prima facie appear only receive title to the land subject to any subsisting impediment thereon. In any case it is not necessary for us to make a final declaration in this respect since the HPCL has not received any eviction notice either from respondent Nos.2 and 3 or respondent No.5 -successful bidder. If in future HPCL receives any notice or any attempt is made on the part of any of the respondents to seek eviction of HPCL from the leased land it would be open for HPCL to resist the same as may be permissible in law. Petition disposed off.
Issues:
1. Petition against auction proceedings initiated by VAT authorities. 2. Validity of auction sale in light of existing lease agreement between HPCL and respondent No.6. 3. Rights of HPCL in relation to the auction sale and lease agreement. 4. Implications of auction sale on HPCL's lease rights. Analysis: Issue 1: The petition was filed by HPCL against the auction proceedings initiated by the VAT authorities concerning the land leased by respondent No.6. HPCL sought a direction to prevent further steps in the auction process dated 10.8.2018. Issue 2: Respondent No.6, the lessee of the land, had outstanding VAT dues, leading to the auction of the property. The successful bidder, respondent No.5, deposited only a token amount, and HPCL objected to the auction sale, emphasizing its subsisting rights on the leased land. Issue 3: HPCL contended that the auction sale disregarded its rights as the land's lessee, despite terminating the distributorship of respondent No.6 due to defaults. HPCL invested significantly in setting up a petrol pump on the land and expressed its intention to allot the land to another distributor. Issue 4: The court acknowledged that the dispute between respondent No.6 and the VAT authorities regarding unpaid dues did not directly involve HPCL. The court clarified that the auction sale would not terminate the existing lease, and any new title acquired would be subject to existing encumbrances. The judgment concluded by stating that HPCL had not received any eviction notice from the respondents. The court disposed of the petition, subject to the understanding that HPCL could resist any future eviction attempts lawfully. The judgment highlighted the importance of existing lease rights and the limited impact of the auction sale on HPCL's position, emphasizing the need for legal procedures to be followed in case of any future disputes.
|
