N SANTHIYAVALLI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appropriate authority has by the impugned order rejected the petitioners' contention that the property with which it was sought to be compared was not comparable as the extent of the other property is 26.08 cents while the extent of the property which is the subject-matter of the agreement between the petitioners is 63 cents and 320 sq. ft. and such rejection, according to the petitioners, is erroneous. THE petitioner also contends that the authority has failed to take note of the non-availability of the title deed with the vendors and the possibility of the minors filing a suit questioning the validity of the release deed in favour of the vendors and the effect of those circumstances on the value of the property.

(2.) THE authority has elaborately discussed the documents such as mortgage deed, release deed, etc., that were available with the vendors and reached the conclusion that they make out a marketable title. That the document of title under which the deceased Narayanaswamy had acquired a title to the property was not available was doubted by the authority. THE authority has also noticed the fact of the filing of a suit for a declaration of title to the property by the petitioners and its pendency. THE authority also did not doubt the fact that the release deed purported to have been executed on behalf of the minors could be questioned by the minors on the ground of inadequacy of consideration, though the authority felt that consideration was there for the release and such consideration was adequate.

(3.) WRIT petitions are allowed. No costs.