9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (3) TMI 29X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilding known as " Sakar-I " complex, situated opp : Gandhigram Railway Station, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad, which is a commercial complex. Respondent No. 2, Dalal Consultants and Engineers Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter called the " vendors " ), are the current occupiers of the said property in question. The vendor executed an agreement to sell that property to the petitioner at a price of Rs. 1,05,08,000 (rupees one crore five lakhs and eight thousand only) (hereinafter called the " apparent consideration "). The vendors submitted the requisite information as per section 269UD of the Act in Form No. 37-I, dated October 18, 1994. Respondent No. 1, who is the appropriate authority, constituted under section 269UD of the Act for the purpose of Chapter XX ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5, the impugned order was passed by rejecting the submissions raised by the transferor and the transferee who have filed written submissions on January 25, 1995, and January 27, 1995, respectively. Three-fold contentions have been raised before us by the petitioner. Firstly, it is contended that the petitioner was not afforded adequate opportunity of hearing by not taking proceedings promptly within the time-frame prescribed under the Act and, therefore, the order is vitiated having been made in breach of the principles of natural justice in hot haste at the close of the time barrier. Secondly, it has been contended that the appropriate authority was under obligation to determine the fair market value of the property in question before it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rs were afforded an adequate opportunity of hearing and after taking into consideration, the written submissions made by them, the order was passed and, therefore, the order cannot be said to be suffering from the vice of the breach of principles of natural justice. Regarding the second contention, learned counsel for the Revenue stated in all fairness that though the contention is covered by the decision relied on by the petitioner in his favour, he strenuously urged that the decision to the extent it holds the determination of the fair market price a condition precedent, requires reconsideration. The requirement of law in view of the decision in the case of C. B. Gautam [1993] 199 ITR 530 (SC) does not travel beyond satisfaction of the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of built-up premises in basement, ground floor and the first floor and according to the apparent consideration in the said sale instance, the built-up area being 14,540 sq. ft. which came to be sold at Rs. 3,98,94,220, the rate per sq. ft. comes to Rs. 2,744 while its discounted sale consideration comes to Rs. 2,681 per sq. ft. which, on the face of it, was more than 15 per cent. of the apparent consideration of the property in question. The appropriate authority in its order has clearly indicated the principle on which it was acting while rejecting the submissions made by the objector. The objector had pointed out that while the property in question comprised built-up area in one single floor, situated in the first floor of the building, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be different and the rate for the lower floor cannot be compared with that for the higher floor and as such, they do not afford comparable criteria for the purpose of arriving at the estimated market value of a part of the floor. If that be so, and in our opinion it is so, then on reading the entire order, we do not find a whisper about the satisfaction of the appropriate authority as to what was the prevailing market rate per sq. ft. of the built-up area of the first floor of commercial property situated on Ashram Road in the near vicinity of the property under consideration. The sale instance on which reliance has been placed by the appropriate authority and which was stated to be the only material before it, was undisputedly a comp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the transferor, the person in occupation of the immovable property if the transferor is not in occupation of the property, the transferee and to every other person whom the appropriate authority knows to be interested in the property. (1B) Every order made by the appropriate authority under sub-section (1) shall specify the grounds on which it is made. " It is the requirement of the statute that before making any order for pre-emptive purchase, the appropriate authority has to give reasonable opportunity of being heard to the transferor, the person who is in occupation of the property and the transferee and also to every person whom the appropriate authority knows to be interested in the prop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
