9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 874X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idity of the same should have been challenged immediately on initiation of the proceedings under Chapter XX-A of the Act of 1961. The petitioner never agitated this cause before any legal forum, though the order passed by the competent authority was also subject matter of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and then before the High Court. A Special Leave Petition was also filed before the Apex Court, but while availing these remedies also the petitioner never agitated the cause which is subject matter of present writ petition. We are of considered opinion that after getting the entire issue threshed as per Chapter XX-A of the Act of 1961, it is not open for the petitioner now to challenge the validity of the provision concern ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r aforesaid reads as follows:- (a) the immovable property bearing khasra No.421 situated between the Circuit House Jodhpur and Chhitar Palace (Umaid Bhawan Palace) and measuring 1,81,818 sq. yd is of a fair market value exceeding ₹ 1,00,000/-; (b) the fair market value of the impugned property as on 1.02.82 exceeds the apparent consideration mentioned in the Registered Sale Deed by more than 15% of such apparent consideration. In fact, the difference between its fair market value and the apparent consideration would have been more if the date of execution of the instrument of transfer had been taken as on 27.07.84; and (c) the consideration for such transfer as agreed to between M/s JMCPL and M/s NGNSS has not been trul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the competent authority under a letter dated 10.8.2011 that the land in question has been divided in 578 plots and those were allotted to its members, therefore, the possession of the land is required to be taken from the allottees and further compensation is also required to be given to those allottees. It was informed to the petitioner society under a letter dated 18.8.2011 that the competent authority has released a draft against compensation and that is to be drawn within a period of seven days, but no initiative was taken by the petitioner to draw the same. The petitioner society ultimately in the year 2014 preferred a petition for writ before this Court to reassess the compensation payable and further to allow interest thereupon @ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed on 16.10.2002. The petitioner never questioned validity of the provision in which proceedings were initiated and were to be dealt with. The petitioner, if had any genuine grievance with the provisions of Section 269-J(1) of the Act of 1961, then validity of the same should have been challenged immediately on initiation of the proceedings under Chapter XX-A of the Act of 1961. The petitioner never agitated this cause before any legal forum, though the order passed by the competent authority was also subject matter of an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and then before the High Court. A Special Leave Petition was also filed before the Apex Court, but while availing these remedies also the petitioner never agitated the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
