State Bank of India Vs. Special Secretary Land and Land Revenue and Reforms and Land and Land Utilisation Deptt. of W.B. and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
.....the date of registration held, amendments carried out by the state of tamil nadu in the act must, therefore, be held to have a prospective operation only. authorities of the state of tamil nadu came to know of the execution of the deeds of sale dated 1.02.1990 only on 30.03.1996. they could have initiated a proceeding, if any, within a period of two years from the said date as provided for in section 47-a of the act. held, however, in terms of section 19-b of the act, the period of limitation provided was four years from the date of registration and not from the date of knowledge. sections 47-a & 19-b:registration of sale deed -stamp duty - limitation to recover deficit stamp duty held, sections 47-a and 19-b of the act provide for penalty. a statute of limitation conferring.....the text below is only a summarized version of the order pronouncedthe issue to be resolved in this case was whether a vacant land held by a bank under a private trust is entitled to exemption under section 19 of the urban land (ceiling and regulation) act, 1976. the apex court held that as no banks holds trust properties as owner envisaged under section 19 of the act or possess vacant land as envisaged under section 19 of the act. thus, a bank even though regarded under trusts act as the owner of trust property-vacant land for the purpose of executing or administering a trust, it cannot hold a trust property-vacant land as its owner or possessed as owner as could make that land eligible for the benefit of exemption envisaged under section 19 of the act.

Judgment:
The Text below is only a summarized version of the order pronounced

The issue to be resolved in this case was whether a vacant land held by a bank under a private trust is entitled to exemption under Section 19 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The Apex Court held that as no banks holds trust properties as owner envisaged under Section 19 of the Act or possess vacant land as envisaged under Section 19 of the Act. Thus, a bank even though regarded under Trusts Act as the owner of trust property-vacant land for the purpose of executing or administering a trust, it cannot hold a trust property-vacant land as its owner or possessed as owner as could make that land eligible for the benefit of exemption envisaged under Section 19 of the Act.