M.P. LAKSHMAN Vs. APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an agreement -holder and he negotiated to purchase a property with the 4th respondent who was the owner of site No. 48 situated at 1st A cross, RMV Extension, Bangalore, which measured 45' x 60' for a consideration of Rs. 16,20,000, Under the provisions of Chapter XX -C of the IT Act, Form No. 37 -1 was filed on 9th April, 1991, by the parties before the appropriate authority and the appropriate authority on considering the application and finding that the value of the property was below the market value by 15 per cent proceeded to pass an order of pre -emptive purchase which is now challenged by the petitioner.

(2.) IN the writ petition, the petitioner has questioned the constitutional validity of the provisions of Chapter XX -C of the Act and sought for quashing of the impugned order issued by the authorities dt. 13th June, 1991, as per Annexure -C, It is pertinent to state here itself that the constitutional validity of the provisions questioned by the petitioner has been upheld and it was held constitutionally valid by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.B. Gautam Vs. Union of India and Others, (1993) 199 ITR 530 SC . The learned counsel for the petitioner also does not dispute about the said fact, but contended that the other merits of the case have to be considered by this Court in the writ petition.

(3.) IN view of the rival contentions raised by the learned counsel, the only point for consideration in this case is as to whether the writ petition is to be allowed and the matter is to be remanded to the competent authority to reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity to the petitioner before passing a fresh order.