2023 (7) TMI 40

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....v Palo, Adv. Mr. Vinay K. Shailendra, Adv. Mr. Saksham Maheshwari, Adv. Mr. Jagjit Singh Chhabra, AOR ORDER SANJIV KHANNA, J. Having regard to Section 70 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 "Act", for short, Sections 148, 183 and 190 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954, as well as, the provisions of Rule 54 Rule 54 of Order XXI (applicable in Punjab, Haryana, Chandigarh, and Delhi) . Attachment of immovable property. -(1) Where the property is immovable, the attachment shall be made by an order prohibiting the judgment debtor from transferring or charging the property in any way, and all persons from taking any benefit from such transfer or charge. (1-A) The order shall also require the judgment-debtor to attend Court on a specifie....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oclamation of attachment of the property no. C-160, Defence Colony, New Delhi, owned by the respondent no. 4 - Jagrit Khaitan, the defaulter - assessee "Attachment Warrant", for short. 2. There is a clear distinction between the service of notice/warrant of attachment on the defaulter - assessee, and publication of proclamation of attachment in the manner and mode prescribed by law, as elucidated in Desh Bandhu Gupta v. N.L. Anand & Rajinder Singh (1994) 1 SCC 131 and Mahakal Automobiles and another v. Kishan Sarup Sharma (2008) 13 SCC 113 and the decision of this Court in M. Marathachalam Pillai v. Padmavathi Ammal and Others (1971) 3 SCC 878,which affirms the decision of the Madras High Court in Padmavathi Ammal v. M. Maruthachalam Pil....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ities in some cases Saheb Khan v. Mohd. Yousufuddin and Others, (2006) 4 SCC 476; Pooranchand Ved Prakash v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 1972 SCC OnLine MP 91; Dhian Singh v. Secretary of State, AIR 1945 Nag 97; and Ratha Harijan v. Narasingha Rana and Others, 1960 SCC OnLine OR 51. This aspect need not be examined in the present case, as it is clear from the affidavit filed by the appellants before the High Court and also from the papers and documents submitted by the appellants before us, that this is a case of substantive, if not complete, omission and non-compliance. Appellants except for making bald statement professing conformity, are unable to give details and particulars of date and the person who had made publication of the proclamati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Sub-Registrar of Assurances. After due verification, he had submitted the report, stating that the property was unencumbered and clear in title. More than 50% of the purchase price was financed by the loan taken from respondent no. 6 - Deutsche Bank. This is not a case of wilful abstention from an enquiry which ought to have been made. This is also not a case of fraudulent transfer in which respondent nos. 1 and 2 were involved. Civil Appeal No. 516 of 2015 Page 5 of 8 4. We have also examined the agreement of sale dated 01.02.2006, executed by the respondent no. 4 - Jagrit Khaitan, the defaulter assessee, in favour of respondent no. 5 - Rajesh Gupta. The agreement mentions payments made by the respondent no. 5 - Rajesh Gupta by differe....