LAWS(MAD)-1998-10-82

SOUTHERN REFRACTORIES AND MINERALS Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 23, 1998
SOUTHERN REFRACTORIES AND MINERALS Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the proposed purchaser, the tenant in possession and the owner of the property being the site and building at No. 57, Triplicane High Road, Triplicane, Madras-5, of an extent of six grounds and 1,431 sq. ft. which is sought to be compulsorily purchased by the appropriate authority. That authority by its order dated February 3, 1993, has held that the value of the property as set out in the agreement dated May 17, 1991, between the proposed vendor and the proposed purchaser is understated by 30 per cent. THE amount of consideration set out in the agreement being Rs. 60 lakhs while in the valuation of the authority, the market value of that property is held to be Rs. 80.67 lakhs based upon the guideline value in the area. THE tenant of the premises whose possession is set out in Form No. 37-I and whose possession has also been verified by the authority by personal inspection and to whom notic has been issued calling upon him to surrender vacant possession, has challenged the action of the appropriate authority seeking possession from the tenant while the proposed vendor and the purchaser have challenged the order of the appropriate authority seeking to exercise its power of compulsory purchase.

(2.) THE proposed vendors are the widow and son of one M. M. Kumar. THEy are stated to be wealthy. It is their case that they wanted three blocks of a hospital to be constructed in the plot to be named after the family, wherein patients from all religions and communities would be treated, and for that purpose, an agreement was entered into with the proposed vendee for the sale of the property at the price of Rs. 60 lakhs with the burden imposed upon them to evict the tenant in possession of the property.

(3.) COUNSEL for the Revenue sought to support the order of the authority and submitted that the authority had rightly adopted the guideline value and limited its consideration to Form No. 37-I.