Orissa High Court Converts Leasehold to Ownership in Favor of Heirs

The Orissa High Court ruled in favor of the petitioners, heirs seeking to convert leasehold rights to ownership to settle outstanding demands against a deceased individual's estate. The court found the State's opposition based on outstanding certificate dues and property attachment unsubstantiated, noting the property's detachment from the mentioned case. Emphasizing the potential for revenue recovery through ownership, the court directed the State to effect the conversion within four weeks upon revenue's consent, setting aside the previous order.

---

---

Issues: Conversion of leasehold right to ownership, outstanding certificate dues, transfer restrictions under section 281 of Income Tax Act, 1961, attachment of property for recovery, relation to other pending cases

The judgment by the Orissa High Court, delivered by Justice Arindam Sinha and Justice Sanjay Kumar Mishra, revolves around the issue of converting leasehold rights to ownership for dealing with outstanding demands against the estate of a deceased individual. The petitioners, as heirs and legal representatives, seek this conversion to liquidate the demands. The State, represented by Mr. A.K. Nanda, opposes the conversion, citing outstanding certificate dues from the estate and attachment of the property for recovery. Mr. T.K. Satapathy, representing revenue, highlights the restriction on transfer under section 281 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and the need for permission for such conversion. The court notes an indenture from 1998 involving the deceased individual, the subsequent lessor, and the Governor of Orissa, indicating a possible restraint on assignment. The absence of the original lease further complicates the assessment of any restrictions on assignment.

The court delves into the provisions of section 281 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, which allows transfer with the Assessing Officer's permission. The State's refusal for conversion is based on the property's attachment by the Income Tax Department for recovery and its sub-judice status in another case. However, a previous order clarifies that the property is not related to the mentioned case, undermining the State's grounds for opposition. The court acknowledges the likelihood of assignment restrictions on the leasehold and the petitioners' desire to convert their interest to ownership to pay the revenue demands.

The State's argument against conversion includes the deceased individual's hasty application for conversion without approval, deemed illegal. The court dismisses this argument as unsubstantiated and impermissible. The State's primary opposition lies in the recovery of certificate dues and the attachment of the property. The court opines that allowing the conversion could facilitate revenue recovery through the owned land, rendering the State's opposition unsustainable. If revenue permits the conversion, the impugned order will be set aside, and the State must effect the conversion within four weeks. Ultimately, the court disposes of the writ petition in favor of the petitioners, subject to revenue's consent for the conversion.

---