CHAMUNDI HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the order dt. 28th Oct., 1994 passed by the Appropriate Authority (Respondent No. 1) by which it has treated the statement filed in the prescribed Form No. 37-I as required under s. 269UC of the IT Act, 1961, as non est in law and has thereby refused to exercise its powers under Chapter XX-C either to purchase the property in question or to issue no objection certificate under s. 269UL(3) of the said Act. There is a further prayer of issuance of writ of mandamus directing the first respondent to issue the statutory no objection certificate forthwith.

(2.) THE first petitioner is a private limited company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. THE second petitioner is one of its shareholders. According to the them the petitioner-company is the absolute owner of 45 acres of land with superstructures standing thereon being a part of the property, known as 'the Bangalore Palace Property' having an extent more or less of 454 acres. According to the petitioners, as disclosed in the writ petition, in the course of business, the third respondent-company, which is engaged in the business of development of properties, entered into an agreement dt. 6th July, 1994 with the first petitioner for developing 35 acres of land out of the said 45 acres by constructing residential complexes thereon with support facilities, such as club, house, school, shopping centre, community hall, etc. As per the petitioners under the said agreement, in consideration of the petitioners agreeing to transfer/convey their undivided 50% share in their property to the third respondent developer, the latter has agreed to build and deliver to the first petitioner 50% of the total buildup area of the building to be constructed on the said land.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioners, keeping in view the judicial pronouncements referred to in paragraph 7 of the writ petition, since respondent Appropriate Authority has failed to exercise its option to purchase as vested in it under s. 269UD(1) of the IT Act within three months from the end of the month in which statement under Form No. 37-I was received by the said authority, they are bound to issue a certificate as contemplated under s. 269UL of the IT Act, to the extent that "it has no objection to the transfer of such property for an amount equal to the apparent consideration thereof as stated in the agreement for transfer of immovable property in respect of which it has received the statement under sub-s. (3) of s. 269UC."