Government Can Resume Leased Land For Public Purpose; 'Substantial Compliance' Of 60-Day Notice Sufficient: Kerala High Court Revenue Can't Cite Pending Litigation to Justify One Year of Adjudication Inaction: Karnataka High Court Limitation | 1,142 Days of Silence: Orissa High Court Rejects Litigant's Claim That His Lawyer Never Called SC/ST Act's Bar on Anticipatory Bail Does Not Apply When Complaint Fails to Make Out Prima Facie Case: Karnataka High Court Oral Agreement for Sale Cannot Be Dismissed for Want of Stamp or Registration: Calcutta High Court Upholds Injunction Finance Company's Own Legal Manager Cannot Appoint Arbitrator — Award Passed by Such Arbitrator Is Non-Est and Inexecutable: Andhra Pradesh High Court District Court Cannot Remand Charity Commissioner's Order: Bombay High Court Division Bench Settles Conflicting Views Framing "Points For Determination" Not Always Mandatory For First Appellate Courts: Allahabad High Court Delhi HC Finds Rape Conviction Cannot Stand On Testimony Where Victim Showed 'Unnatural Concern' For Her Alleged Attacker Limitation in Partition Suit Cannot Be Decided Without Evidence: Karnataka High Court Cheque Dishonour Accused Can Probabilise Defence Without Entering Witness Box — Through Cross-Examination And Marked Documents Alone: Madras High Court Contributory Negligence | No Driving Licence and Three on a Motorcycle Cannot Mean the Victim Caused the Accident: Rajasthan High Court LL.B Degree Cannot Be Ground to Deny Maintenance to Divorced Wife: Gujarat High Court Dried Leaves and Branches Are Not 'Ganja': Delhi High Court Grants Bail Under NDPS Act Family Court Judge Secretly Compared Handwriting Without Telling Wife, Then Punished Her Hesitation: Delhi High Court Quashes Divorce Decree Co-Owner Can Sell Undivided Share in Joint Property Without Consent of Other Co-owners — Sale Deed Valid to Extent of Transferor's Share: Orissa High Court Mandatory Safeguards of Section 42 NDPS Cannot Be Bypassed — Even When 1329 Kg of Hashish Is Seized: Gujarat High Court Affirms Acquittal

Land lease deed without consideration set aside by Supreme Court in Gwalior Development Authority case

03 September 2024 9:53 AM

By: Admin


On 19 April 2023, Supreme Court, in case titled GWALIOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY  AND ANOTHER VS BHANU PRATAP SINGH, set aside the High Court's decision directing the Gwalior Development Authority to execute a lease deed for the remaining land without consideration. The court observed that the Authority's decision to extend undue indulgence to the bidder violates Article 14 of the Constitution. However, the respondent is given one opportunity to acquire the remaining land on priority based on the prevalent circle rate notified by the Government.

The court held that the direction was beyond jurisdiction and contrary to settled principles of law. The bench comprised Justice Rastogi and Justice Nariman, who heard the arguments and concluded the case on 13th April 2023.

A tender floated by the Gwalior Development Authority on 13th March, 1997, inviting bids for the grant of leases of different plots under the transport city scheme. Bhanu Pratap Singh was one of the bidders for the MC-2 plot area of 27887.50 sq. meters. Singh's offer of Rs.725 per sq. meter was the highest bid, and he was issued a letter of allotment on 29th September 1997. The letter stipulated that Singh had to deposit a sum of Rs.1,91,67,966/- by 31st October 1999, in addition to the earnest money of Rs.15 lakhs, in four instalments. However, Singh deposited the instalments in a piecemeal fashion, and the final instalment was deposited on 25th August 2005.

Despite the failure of Singh to deposit the instalments as per the bid document, no action was taken by the appellants either for the cancellation of the bid or for forfeiture of the amount deposited by the respondent. Finally, the lease deed was executed for 18262.89 sq. meters on 29th March 2006, and the transaction was concluded. After more than three and a half years, Singh filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a mandamus against the appellants to execute the lease deed for the remaining area of 9625.50 sq. meters.

The Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh passed a judgment on 21st April 2011, directing the Gwalior Development Authority to execute the lease deed in favour of Singh for the remaining area without any consideration, with liability on the respondent to make payment of interest. The Authority filed an appeal against the judgment in the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court held that the transaction was concluded on execution of the lease deed for 18262.89 sq. meters on 29th March 2006, and after the instrument was registered under the law, it was not open to either party to question it in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution. The court observed that the mandate of natural justice had no role to play in the given facts and circumstances of the case.

The court held that the direction to execute the lease deed for the remainder of the area without any consideration was completely contrary to settled principles of law and deserved to be set aside. The bench observed that the litigation had been pending for a sufficiently long time, and keeping in view the escalation in the value of the property, one opportunity should be made available to Singh for the remainder of the area on priority basis on the prevalent circle rate notified by the Government.

GWALIOR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY  AND ANOTHER VS BHANU PRATAP SINGH

Latest Legal News