TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 1594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ismissed the revision petition filed by the appellant against an order dated 16.05.2016 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission [For short the 'SCDRC'] affirming the order of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum [For short the 'DCDRF']. The respondent had sought conversion of Plot No. 4059, Sector 46 D, Chandigarh, from leasehold to freehold site on acceptance of the requisite conversion fee. The learned District Forum directed the appellant to convert the said plot in question from leasehold to freehold site on acceptance of requisite conversion fee; to pay an amount of Rs. 10,000/- as compensation for mental agony and physical harassment; and to pay Rs.5,000/- as costs of litigation. 3. The learned NCDRC relied upon the judgment of this Court reported as Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta [(1994) 1 SCC 243] to hold that the respondent would be considered to be a consumer as fee had been charged by the appellant for conversion. The NCDRC further held that the administrator had put a note on the file that he would not like to take any decision till he gets clear directions from the Central Government. It was held that the appellant had not p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, until the entire consideration money together with interest or any other amount, if any, due to the Central Government on account of the transfer of any site or building, or both, under sub-action (12) is paid, such site or building, or both, as the case may be, shall continue to belong to the Central Government." 7. In terms of power conferred on the Central Government under Section 3, initially Chandigarh (Sale of Sites and Buildings) Rules, 1960 [For short '1960 Rules'] were published on 08.03.1960. Such rules contemplated sale of sites by auction or allotment. The Chandigarh Lease Hold of Sites and Building Rules, 1973 [For short '1973 Rules'] were thereafter published on 20.08.1973 authorizing Chandigarh Administration to demise sites and buildings at Chandigarh on lease for 99 years by allotment or by auction. Rule 13 mandates that in addition to the premium i.e., price paid or promised for the transfer of a right to enjoy an immovable property under 1973 Rules, an annual rent would be payable which shall be 21/2% of the premium for 33 years which may be enhanced by the Chandigarh Admini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....perty and the present value of the premium paid for the property. The current market value of the property shall be assessed in view of the average of auction price over the last three financial years for property of the same category or such other evidence as the Estate Officer deems to be appropriate. The present value of the original premium shall be calculated by enhancing the premium by 9% per annum, compounded annually, from the date(s) of payment. The difference between these two values shall be the unearned increase. During assessment, notice shall be issued to the lessee and he shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard." 8. The Chandigarh Administration framed 1996 Rules permitting conversion of residential leasehold properties to freehold properties. Some of the conditions of the said Rules are as follows: "5. Land rates will be the rates as notified by the Chandigarh Administration from time to time. 6. Conversion charges to be paid shall be as provided in Annexure "A" annexed to these rules, from time to time. 8. The conversion shall also be allowed in the cases where the lessees/sub-lessees/allottees have parted with the possession o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al lease hold land tenure into freehold land tenure, Rule 1996" is under consideration of the Administration. You are directed not to allow any conversion under the said scheme till further orders. Sd/- Joint Secretary (Estates) For Finance Secretary Chandigarh Administration" 10. Mr. Ankit Goel, learned counsel for the appellant argued that the title of leasehold property vests with the Central Government in terms of Section 3 of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. The Central Government had granted lease of residential plots for a period of 99 years under the 1973 Rules. The conversion fee fixed to convert leasehold property leased for 99 years to freehold property, if allowed, would absolve the allottees from payment of annual rent in terms of Rule 13 as well as the payment of unearned increase in the case of transfer of leasehold rights in terms of Rule 17(10) of the 1973 Rules. Thus, an un-encumbered title would pass on to the purchaser as against 99-year lease to an allottee under the 1973 Rules. Therefore, the findings recorded by the NCDRC that the respondents are consumers as charges have been paid for conversion are not tenable for the reason ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing conducted under Section 13, the District Forum is satisfied that the goods complained against suffer from any of the defects specified in the complaint or that any of the allegations contained in the complaint about the services are proved, it shall issue an order to the opposite party directing him to do one or more of the following things, namely: (a) xxx xxxx (e) to remove the defects in goods or deficiencies in the services in question; (f) xxx xxxx 12. In M.K. Gupta, the question posed was as to the word "service" extends to the deficiency in construction of a house or flat. It was held that such construction was for the benefit of person for whom it was to be constructed. The allottee may do so himself or hire services of a builder or contractor. When a statutory authority develops land or allots a site or constructs a house for the benefit of common man, it is a statutory service. But if such service is provided by a builder or contractor, it would be a contractual service. The Court held as under: "4. What is the meaning of the word 'service'? Does it extend to deficiency in the building of a house or flat? Can a complaint ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....m his obligation as agreed to. A flat with a leaking roof, or cracking wall or substandard floor is denial of service. Similarly when a statutory authority undertakes to develop land and frame housing scheme, it, while performing statutory duty renders service to the society in general and individual in particular. The entire approach of the learned counsel for the development authority in emphasising that power exercised under a statute could not be stretched to mean service proceeded on misconception. It is incorrect understanding of the statutory functions under a social legislation. A development authority while developing the land or framing a scheme for housing discharges statutory duty the purpose and objective of which is service to the citizens. As pointed out earlier the entire purpose of widening the definitions is to include in it not only day to day buying of goods by a common man but even such activities which are otherwise not commercial but professional or service-oriented in nature. The provisions in the Acts, namely, Lucknow Development Act, Delhi Development Act or Bangalore Development Act clearly provide for preparing plan, development of land, and framing of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d as under: "51. If the final order passed by the High Court is read in conjunction with the interim order dated 11-5-1992, it becomes clear that the Societies were to deposit the remaining amount with interest at the rate of 18% per annum only if they were to accept allotment of flats under the Scheme. Although, the writ petitions were filed by the Societies, the language of the interim order passed by the High Court shows that the learned Judges were thinking of imposing liability of 18% interest only on those members who were to accept allotment of flats to be constructed by the Societies. The members of the Societies did not get an opportunity to accept the allotment because even after deposit of full earnest money and 18% interest, the Board did not allot land to the Societies on which they could construct dwelling units/flats. The Finance Secretary misinterpreted the orders of the High Court and issued wholly arbitrary and unjust directive to the Board not to refund 18% interest to the members of the Societies who had applied for refund before allotment of land by the Board." 15. In fact, the precise issue as to whether the auction of sites under the 1973 Rules in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on payment of the charges which are fixed by the Administration. Such conversion was sought in view of the fact that as against the limited right in the lease property for 99 years, the Administration has decided to grant freehold rights on satisfaction of certain conditions mentioned in the 1996 Rules. The fact is that the respondents had paid the premium amount as fixed under the 1973 Rules. Now, the claim is for purchase of remaining rights of the Central Government to convert the site into freehold. The Central Government continues to be owner of the land until the entire consideration money together with interest or any other amount is paid to the Central Government on account of transfer of any site or building or both as provided in Section 3 of the Act. Therefore, the owner i.e., the Central Government, cannot be said to be a trader or a service provider. The appellant is not charging any fee for conversion of leasehold property into freehold property except the amount in accordance with the 1996 Rules, which is part of the sale consideration. It is thus a case of sale of immovable property on the terms as were fixed in the 1996 Rules. The amount so fixed under the Rules wo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....office by the Amendment of the Constitution in 1956.], is to act with the aid and advice of his Council of Ministers. Therefore, until such advice is accepted by the Governor whatever the Minister or the Council of Ministers may say in regard to a particular matter does not become the action of the State until the advice of the Council of Ministers is accepted or deemed to be accepted by the Head of the State. Indeed, it is possible that after expressing one opinion about a particular matter at a particular stage a Minister or the Council of Ministers may express quite a different opinion, one which may be completely opposed to the earlier opinion. Which of them can be regarded as the "order" of the State Government? Therefore, to make the opinion amount to a decision of the Government it must be communicated to the person concerned. In this connection we may quote the following from the judgment of this Court in the State of Punjab v. Sodhi Sukhdev Singh [AIR (1961) SC 493, 512] : "Mr Gopal Singh attempted to argue that before the final order was passed the Council of Ministers had decided to accept the respondent's representation and to reinstate him, and that, accor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....05.2013, it would not confer any enforceable right in favour of the allottees. Reference was made to Chandigarh Administration v. Jagjit Singh [(1995) 1 SCC 745]. We do not find any merit in the argument of Mr. Goel. On the date when the letter was issued by the administration on 10.05.2013, the statutory 1996 Rules were in force. Such Rules were kept in abeyance on the basis of communication on behalf of the Finance Secretary to the Estate Officer. Such communication cannot be countenanced. The statutory rules could not be put to hold because the issue of revision of rates of conversion was under consideration of the Administration. Even after the said letter the rates were fixed only in 2017. In the face of valid statutory Rules, an administrative decision cannot be sustained. 24. Since the respondents are already in possession of the sites as lessee on 99 years basis, it cannot be said that the appellant was deficient in providing any service, which even if used in a liberal sense would not include transfer of title in an immovable property. Thus, the consumer fora under the Act would not have jurisdiction to entertain the consumer complaints on the ground of deficiency in se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r consideration, the Power of Attorney shall not be registered unless the proper stamp duty is affixed thereon. (iii) If the proper stamp duty is not paid on a Power of Attorney executed on and after 15.11.2007, the Registering Authority shall refuse to register the document on the basis of such attorney at any subsequent stage unless proper stamp duty is affixed thereon in accordance with law. (iv) The Chandigarh Administration may re-examine Rule 17(10) of the 1973 Rules contemplating unearned increase, as well the restriction to sell the properties before the expiry of specific years, as the root-cause of malice of Power of Attorneys sales. (v) The Chandigarh Administration to frame Rules to maintain and update the property records in the manner mutations are sanctioned in respect of non urban properties under the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 or such other procedure, which is fair, reasonable and transparent." 28. The Full Bench of the High Court in Dheera Singh v. U.T. Chandigarh Admn. and Ors. [2012 SCC Online P&H 21473] noticed that the Executive has failed to live-up to the expectations of the residents as instead of approaching the concerned M....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it appropriate to issue the following directions: (iii) The Union Territory of Chandigarh through its Administrator shall take steps as may be necessary for updation of the 1952 Act in the light of the observations made by us in paragraphs 102, 103 & 105 of this order before March 31, 2013." 29. But nothing appears to have been done either in terms of Amritpal Singh or Dheera Singh. Dheera Singh has laid down the process of exercising the power of resumption. However, many cases of alleged misuse have been initiated but not concluded by the Estate Office. The residents of Chandigarh are widely harassed while seeking no-objection certificate for sale of leasehold property as the procedure for grant of no-objection certificate and of deposit of unearned increase is interpreted in different manners by the different officials, which the officers of the Administration has failed to control. Another area of concern is the unreasonable procedure adopted by the Administration for affecting mutation after the demise of the leaseholder or the allottee and of completing other formalities at the offices of the appellant. The difficult and near impossible procedure leads to arbitrar....