APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY Vs. RASIKLAL M. DHARIWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE review applications are filed by the Appropriate Authority under Section 269UG of the IT Act, 1961, in respect of purchase by Central Government of immovable properties under certain cases of transfer under Chapter XX -C of the Act. The applications are filed for recalling part of the directions given by this Court in judgment dt. 12th April, 2004 while disposing of Special Civil Appln. No. 8606 of 2004 and two cognate petitions.

(2.) ON 25th Jan., 1996, opponent Nos. 3 and 4 herein {hereinafter referred to as 'the vendors') executed an agreement to sell the property in question at Pune in favour of opponent Nos. 1 and 2 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the purchasers' or 'vendees') for a consideration of Rs. 240 lakhs, which amount was to be paid in three instalments upon execution of the agreement on 25th Jan., 1996 (Rs. 75 lakhs), the second instalment to be paid by 10th March, 1996 (Rs. 50 lakhs) and the third and final instalment to be paid at the time of execution of the conveyance on or before 30th April, 1996 (Rs. 115 lakhs). In accordance with the aforesaid agreement, the purchasers paid Rs. 75 lakhs on 25th Jan., 1996 and another instalment of Rs. 50 lakhs on 30th March, 1996, i.e., total amount of Rs. 125 lakhs was paid by the purchasers to the vendors on the aforesaid dates. When the parties submitted Form Wo. 37 -1) under Section 269UC of the Act on 2nd Feb., 1996, the order of purchase dt. 24th May, 1996 came to be passed by the Appropriate Authority under Section 269UD. When that order came to be challenged, this Court set aside the order and remanded the matter to the Appropriate Authority. On 30th Sept., 1996, the order of purchase came to be passed by the Appropriate Authority, which came to be challenged in Special Civil Appln. Nos. 8606 of 1996, 2171 and 3399 of 1997 by the vendors, the purchasers and another party claiming to be interested in the property. The petitions came to be opposed by the respondents by filing an affidavit -in - reply of the Appropriate Authority in Special Civil Appln. No. 2171 of 1997 wherein the Appropriate Authority made the following submissions:

(3.) AT the hearing of the applications, Mr. Tanvish U. Bhatt, learned standing counsel for the Appropriate Authority, has submitted that Sub -section (4) of Section 269UG confers discretion on the Appropriate Authority as to whether the amount received from the Central Government under Sub -section (3) is required to be invested and even if the amount is invested, again discretion is conferred on the Appropriate Authority to decide whether to direct the payment of interest to the intending vendor/s or purchaser/s. It is submitted that it is for the Appropriate Authority to pay such amount of interest for giving the parties having interest in the property the same benefits therefrom as they might have had from the immovable property in question which would depend upon the market value of the property at the time of sale of the property by the Central Government.