Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2008 (5) TMI 725

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the said Court in SCA No. 7092 of 2001. 3. Before embarking upon the issue involved in this appeal, we may notice the admitted fact of the matter. The Government of Gujarat in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 65 of the Act made a scheme in respect of the town of Umra, Surat on 1.06.1999. Plot Nos. 17/7 and 17/8 were owned by Respondent No. 4 herein. Appellant was a tenant under the said respondent in respect of Plot No. 17/8 admeasuring 1067 sq.m. He used to run a business of marble and stone therein. A road widening project was proposed in terms of the said scheme. Notices therefore were issued both to the appellant as also the respondent No. 4. Appellant objected thereto. He, however, did not pursue his case in regard to the proposal for widening of the road. For the said public purpose, viz., widening of the road, 867 sq. m. of land was taken over leaving only 200 sq. m. of land. With a view to give effect to the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder, proceedings were initiated for allotment of the said land in terms of the Act. 20% of the land was taken over without payment of any compensation. In respect of the proceedings ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as questioned by the appellant by filing a writ petition in the High Court of Gujarat inter alia contending that the purported final allotment of plot No. 165 in favour of the respondent No. 3 and allotment of final plot No. 157 in favour of the respondent No. 4 were made without issuing any notice as envisaged under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act. In the said writ petition, it was prayed: 8. On the facts and circumstances mentioned herein above, the Petitioner prays to your Lordships that: (A) Be pleased to issue writ of Mandamus or writ in the nature of Mandamus or appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the impugned action of acquiring and demolishing the structures available on the land in question, i.e., Original Plot No. 17/A - R.S. No. 17/P, situated at Umra, Surat. 6. A learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the said writ petition inter alia opining that the interest of landlord and tenant being common and in absence of any inter se dispute between them even if any portion of the land which remained in possession of the tenant was included in the Scheme, the proper remedy would be to claim compensation to that extent, hold....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ould submit: (i) The provisions of Sections 52 and 81 being imperative in character, no acquisition of land is permissible without service of any notice upon the persons interested which would include a tenant in occupation and carrying on business thereon. (ii) A tenant having regard to the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act or otherwise having an interest in the property cannot be deprived therefrom without following the procedure established by law and without initiation of any proceedings for acquisition of land. (iii) The tenant's interest being distinct and separate could not have been held to be merged with the interest of the landlord, either for the purpose of allotment of a final plot or otherwise in favour of the landlord. (iv) Appellant having a right over the remaining 200 sq. m. of the land of original plot No. 17/8 should be allowed to continue thereupon and final allotment made in favour of the respondent No. 3 to that extent should be cancelled. Mr. Lalit in support of his contention strongly relied upon a decision of this Court in Mansukhlal Jadavji Darji and Ors. v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and Ors. AIR199....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r giving notice as aforesaid, determine in a case in which a final plot is to be allotted to persons in ownership in common, the shares of such persons; Further, Sub-section (3) of Section 65, Sections 67 and 68 of the Act read as under: - Power of Government to sanction or refuse to sanction the scheme and effect of sanction - (3) On and After the date fixed in such notification, the preliminary scheme or the final scheme, as the case may be, shall have effect as if it were enacted in this Act. - Effect of preliminary scheme On the day on which the preliminary scheme comes into force- (a) all lands required by the appropriate authority shall, unless it is otherwise determined in such scheme, vest absolutely in the appropriate authority free from all encumbrances; (b) all rights in the original plots which have been re-constituted into final plots shall determine and the final plots shall become subject to the rights settled by the Town Planning Officer. - Power of appropriate authority to evict summarily On and after the date on which a preliminary scheme comes into force, any person continuing to occupy any l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er or Servant to remove him. (c) If the person to be evicted resists or obstructs the officer or Servant deputed under Clause (b) or if he re-occupies the land after eviction, the appropriate authority shall prosecute him under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code. 14. Before embarking upon the rival contentions, we may also notice that the provisions of the Bombay Town Planning Rules, 1955 (for short "the Bombay Rules") are in pari materia with `the Rules'. Rule 21 of the Bombay Rules provides for the Procedure to be followed by the Town Planning Officer. It makes it obligatory on the part of the officer to give notice of the date on which he will commence his duties and shall state therein the time, within which the owner of any property or rights which is injuriously affected by the making of the town planning scheme shall be advertised in one or more newspapers published in the regional language and circulating within the jurisdiction of the local authority and shall be posted in prominent places at or near the area comprised in the scheme and at the office of the Town Planning Officer. Sub-Rule (3) of Rule 21 of the Bombay Rules provides for serving of a Spe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ate, viz., when the Town Planning Scheme is notified in the official gazette, he, whether an owner or tenant or sub-tenant, must be in possession of the property. 18. In Jaswantsingh Mathurasingh (supra), it was reiterated that a tenant or a sub-tenant is a person interested and is entitled to notice. In that context, it was held: 8. The question is whether the tenant or a sub-tenant is a person interested and is entitled to notice. It is obvious that under Section 105 of Transfer of Property Act, a lease creates right or an interest in enjoyment of the demised property and a tenant or a sub-tenant is entitled to remain in possession of the demised property until the lease is duly terminated and eviction takes place in accordance with law. therefore, a tenant or a sub-tenant in possession of a tenement in the Town Planning Scheme is a person interested within the meaning of Rules 21(3) and (4) of the Rules. But he must be in possession of the property on the crucial date i.e. when the Town Planning Scheme is notified in the official Gazette. Every owner or tenant or a sub-tenant, in possession on that date alone shall be entitled to a notice and opportunity. 19. Rule....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in his own right entitled to final allotment of some plot. 23. We would, however, assume that it was obligatory on the part of the State to serve a special notice upon the appellant. The question, however, would be : what would be the consequence of non-compliance thereof vis-`-vis the conduct of the appellant himself? 24. A person may waive a right either expressly or by necessary implication. He may in a given case disentitle himself from obtaining an equitable relief particularly when he allows a thing to come to an irreversible situation. 25. Different statutes provide for different manner of service of notice. The Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 provides that every person whose name appears in the assessment list or land revenue records shall be served with notice. [See Sureshchandra C. Mehta v. State of Karnataka and Ors. ] In West Bengal Housing Board etc. v. Brijendra Prasad Gupta and Ors., etc. AIR 1997 SC 2745 , it was opined that the authority is not required to make a roaming enquiry as to who is the person entitled to notice. 26. We have referred to the said decisions only to show that the requirements in regard to the manner of service of noti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tc. 29. When a statute makes an elaborate provision as regards the formalities required to be undergone at every stage by the local authority, the State Government and other authorities concerned in preparing and making the final Town Planning Scheme, the same should be considered to be exhaustively. [See Maneklal Chhotalal and Ors. v. M.G. Makwana and Ors. [1967] 3 SCR 65 In Maneklal Chhotalal (supra), it was held: 49. therefore, having due regard to the substantive and procedural aspects, we are satisfied that the Act imposes only reasonable restrictions, in which case, it is saved under Article 19(5) of the Constitution. The considerations referred to above will also show that the grievance of the petitioners that Article 14 is violated, is also not acceptable. [See also Bhikhubhai Vithlabhai Patel and Ors. v. State of Gujarat and Anr. AIR 2008 SC 1771 ] 30. We are, however, not oblivious that in a given situation, a question may also arise as to whether the restrictions imposed by a statute are reasonable or not. 31. It is not a case where the State by its acts of omissions and commissions was unjustly enriching itself. It was a dispute between two private ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....abandonment by way of confession and avoidance if the right is thereafter asserted, and is either express or implied from conduct. It may arise from a party making an election, for example whether or not to exercise a contractual right.... Waiver may also be by virtue of equitable or promissory estoppel; unlike waiver arising from an election, no question arises of any particular knowledge on the part of the person making the representation, and the estoppel may be suspensory only.... Where the waiver is not express, it may be implied from conduct which is inconsistent with the continuance of the right, without the need for writing or for consideration moving from, or detriment to, the party who benefits by the waiver, but mere acts of indulgence will not amount to waiver; nor may a party benefit from the waiver unless he has altered his position in reliance on it As early as 1957, the concept of waiver was articulated in a case involving the late assertion of a claim regarding improper constitution of a Tribunal in Manak Lal v. Dr. Prem Chand [1957] 1 SCR 575 in the following terms: It is true that waiver cannot always and in every case be inferred merely from the failure of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e asked the Court to do before any other step in the proceedings had been taken. I think he is altogether too late. It is to my mind a clear principle of equity, and I have no doubt there are abundant authorities on the point, that equity will interfere to prevent the machinery of an Act of Parliament being used by a person to defeat equities which he has himself raised, and to get rid of a waiver created by his own acts. The legal principle emerging from these decisions is also stated in Craies on Statute Law (6th Edn.) at page 369 as follows: As a general rule, the conditions imposed by statutes which authorise legal proceedings are treated as being indispensable to giving the court jurisdiction. But if it appears that the statutory conditions were inserted by the legislature simply for the security or benefit of the parties to the action themselves, and that no public interests are involved, such conditions will not be considered as indispensable, and either party may waive them without affecting the jurisdiction of the court. [emphasis supplied] Applying the above principles to the present case, it must be held that the benefit of notice provided under t....