A D THIRU HUF Vs. APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY consent this matter has been taken up for final hearing and learned counsel for the parties heard.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved by the order of the first respondent passed on November 29, 1994, on the statement in Form No. 37-I filed by the petitioner on August 31, 1994, for the transfer of the property located at 33, Rudra Road, St. Thomas Mount, Madras. By that order the authority did not decide to acquire the property. Nor did it issue a no objection certificate for the transfer of the property to respondent No. 2. THE authority's decision was merely to lodge the statement :

(3.) THE no objection certificate only signifies that the authority had decided not to acquire the property and nothing more. Such a certificate is necessary only for the purpose of registering the document of transfer. Such a certificate neither confers immunity from penal or other action for violation of other laws, nor does it have the effect of validating a transfer made in contravention of any offer statute.