MASS TRADERS P LTD Vs. APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE petitions are directed against the orders at Annex. G in No. AA/bng/ 5 (35)7/89-90/1993, Annex. G1 in No. AA/bng/5 (35)7/89-90/1993 and Annex. F in No. AA/bng/5 (35)7/89-90/1993, issued by the first respondent. Petitioner wants a direction directing the Appropriate Authority, the first respondent, to issue no objection certificate and to return the bank guarantee of Rs. 2. 85 crores to the petitioner for cancellation.

(2.) FACTS in brief are as follows : Petitioner is a private limited company. It has entered into two agreements on 22nd May, 1989 with the second and third respondents viz. , Mrs. Aimai N. Irani and Mr. Darius N. Irani through their power of attorney, Mr. Godrez K. Irani, for the purchase of their respective shares in the ratio of 3:1 of the property bearing Nos. 4 and 5, situated at Infantry road, Bangalore, for a consideration of Rs. 1,38,04,850 and Rs. 46,01,475, i. e. , for a total consideration of Rs. 1,84,06,325. Two forms in Form No. 37-I prescribed under Rule 48l of the it Rules, 1962, duly filled in by the transferors and the transferee were filed before the first respondent on 23rd May, 1989. Statements were accompanied by the respective agreements. Third respondent is a non-resident, non-citizen, though of Indian origin. Second respondent is the mother of the third respondent, and both of them were the legal heirs of Mr. Nariman K. Irani. First respondent after inspecting the property and after recording the reasons by two separate orders passed by it, ordered purchase of the said property by the Central Government for a total consideration of Rs. 1,84,06,325. Orders were passed under Section 269ud (1) of the it Act, 1961 ("act" for short), on 25th July, 1989. Transferors did not question the purchase order dt. 25th July, 1989, but instead immediately after the passing of the purchase orders, surrendered the vacant possession of the property to the Appropriate Authority along with original documents. Aggrieved by these orders, petitioner filed writ petitions in Writ Petn. Nos. 14319 and 14320 of 1989. This Court admitted the petition and granted interim orders.

(3.) THIRD respondent, being a citizen of United States of America, required approval of the RBI to sell his interest in the property. An application was made for this purpose to the RBI. The bank approved the same in favour of the petitioner. Annex. B is the approval order. Fifth respondent undertook to tender the purchase consideration subject to respondents 2 and 3 furnishing the bank guarantee for sums of Rs. 1,38,04,850 and Rs. 46,01,475. Fifth respondent passed an order of payment in favour of respondents 2 and 3 under Section 269uf (i) of the Act. Actual payments were withheld for non-furnishing of bank guarantee. Thereafter, time was extended by this Court for actual payment. Petitioner's earlier petitions were heard on merits by the learned single Judge of this Court. This Court allowed the writ petitions without going into the constitutional validity of the provisions of Chapter XX-C of the Act. Order of this High Court is filed at Annex. C to these petitions. First respondent filed writ appeals in Writ Appeal Nos. 2164 and 2165 of 1992. The Division Bench disposed of the matter on 1st, 4th and 8th March, 1993. Writ appeals were allowed. Order dt. 25th July, 1989, passed by the first respondent was quashed not for reasons stated in the judgment of the learned single Judge but for the reasons set out in judgment of the division Bench. The order of the Division Bench is at Annex. E to these petitions. Special Leave petitions were filed and the Supreme Court ordered notice to both in respect of admission and in respect of interim orders in the case on hand.