Vardhman Properties Ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
delhi municipal corporation act, 1957 - section 128 r/w bye laws of dmc taxation misc. provision bye laws, 1959--notice to be given either in form a or form b as required--details of transfer of title necessary--in present case details not furnished--directions pertaining to details of transfer of property given--petition disposed of.;accordingly it is directed that the petitioner shall furnish to the respondent the agreement/instrument by which the transfer is purported to have been done. this would give the amount of considerations as well as the particulars of the property. petitioner shall also furnish the letter of handing over of possession as well as letter of consent or request from the allottee/owner for mutation in its favor as available. - - this would give the amount of considerations as well as the particulars of the property.ordermanmohan sarin, j.1. with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.2. petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction for the respondent to assess separately various shops/units in plot no. 9, lsc, mandavali, fazalpur, patparganj, delhi in the name of individual shop purchasers and buyers for purposes of assessment of property tax. mcd it appears is proceeding to assess the properties in the name of the petitioner, who happens to be the builder/developer of the said complex. mcd has issue notices under section 126 of the delhi municipal corporation act.3. parties are at variance on whether the petitioners have complied with the provisions of section 128 of the delhi municipal corporation act or not? learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has given the notice dated 20.1.1999, whereby he furnished the list of allottees to whom flats/units had been transferred. petitioner has also furnished a letter dated 29.3.2001 from the allottees of the flat, requesting for transfer and praying for individual assessment.4. in terms of delhi municipal corporation taxation miscellaneous provisions bye laws 1959, bye law 3, the notice regarding transfer of title required to be given under section 128 is in form a or form b, as applicable. form a is applicable when transfer is effected by an instrument. a perusal of form-a shows that the notice given by the petitioner does not comply with all the requirements set out there. in fact it is not the case of the petitioner that he has given a notice in the prescribed form. petitioner only urges that there is substantial compliance with the requirement of section 128.5. in my view, some of the details, which are required as per form a, have been given for example the date of the instrument of transfer, amount of consideration and complete description of the property in question with its measurements. the initial notice dated 20.1.1999 as given, nevertheless notifies the corporation of the transfer. it gives the name of the vendee to whom it is transferred. learned counsel states that petitioner would furnish such other particulars as may be required. petitioner shall also produce the letter from the purchaser/allottee, if available, giving the consent for transfer and agreeing to pay the charges, as applicable. prima facie, the liability of the petitioner for payment of property tax ought to be confined up to the date of transfer of possession. counsel for the mcd has no objection to this course of action subject to the petitioner furnishing the requisite details.6. accordingly it is directed that the petitioner shall furnish to the respondent the agreement/instrument by which the transfer is purported to have been done. this would give the amount of considerations as well as the particulars of the property. petitioner shall also furnish the letter of handing over of possession as letter of consent or request from the allottee/owner for mutation in its favor as available.7. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not interested in any delay in the matter and to facilitate the assessment shall in fact furnish to the respondent separate file folders for each of the individual shops/units containing the agreement to sell, allotment letter and the letter of request as available. in view of this, the respondents shall not proceed to assess the property in the name of the petitioner, but will make separate assessments for the shops and units where notices have been given. the liability of the petitioner would be confined to the date of handing over of possession to the individual allottees. petitioner's representative will appear before the assistant assessor and collector, mcd, geeta colony, delhi on 4.9.2001 at 2.00 p.m.writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.copy of the judgment be given dusty to counsel for both the parties.

Judgment:
ORDER

Manmohan Sarin, J.

1. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

2. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking a direction for the respondent to assess separately various shops/units in plot No. 9, LSC, Mandavali, Fazalpur, Patparganj, Delhi in the name of individual shop purchasers and buyers for purposes of assessment of property tax. MCD it appears is proceeding to assess the properties in the name of the petitioner, who happens to be the builder/developer of the said complex. MCD has issue notices under Section 126 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act.

3. Parties are at variance on whether the petitioners have complied with the provisions of Section 128 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act or not? Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has given the notice dated 20.1.1999, whereby he furnished the list of allottees to whom flats/units had been transferred. Petitioner has also furnished a letter dated 29.3.2001 from the allottees of the flat, requesting for transfer and praying for individual assessment.

4. In terms of Delhi Municipal Corporation Taxation Miscellaneous Provisions Bye Laws 1959, Bye Law 3, the notice regarding transfer of title required to be given under Section 128 is in Form A or Form B, as applicable. Form A is applicable when transfer is effected by an instrument. A perusal of Form-A shows that the notice given by the petitioner does not comply with all the requirements set out there. In fact it is not the case of the petitioner that he has given a notice in the prescribed form. Petitioner only urges that there is substantial compliance with the requirement of Section 128.

5. In my view, some of the details, which are required as per form A, have been given for example the date of the instrument of transfer, amount of consideration and complete description of the property in question with its measurements. The initial notice dated 20.1.1999 as given, nevertheless notifies the Corporation of the transfer. It gives the name of the vendee to whom it is transferred. Learned counsel states that petitioner would furnish such other particulars as may be required. Petitioner shall also produce the letter from the purchaser/allottee, if available, giving the consent for transfer and agreeing to pay the charges, as applicable. Prima facie, the liability of the petitioner for payment of property tax ought to be confined up to the date of transfer of possession. Counsel for the MCD has no objection to this course of action subject to the petitioner furnishing the requisite details.

6. Accordingly it is directed that the petitioner shall furnish to the respondent the agreement/instrument by which the transfer is purported to have been done. This would give the amount of considerations as well as the particulars of the property. Petitioner shall also furnish the letter of handing over of possession as letter of consent or request from the allottee/owner for mutation in its favor as available.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not interested in any delay in the matter and to facilitate the assessment shall in fact furnish to the respondent separate file folders for each of the individual shops/units containing the agreement to sell, allotment letter and the letter of request as available. In view of this, the respondents shall not proceed to assess the property in the name of the petitioner, but will make separate assessments for the shops and units where notices have been given. The liability of the petitioner would be confined to the date of handing over of possession to the individual allottees. Petitioner's representative will appear before the Assistant Assessor and Collector, MCD, Geeta Colony, Delhi on 4.9.2001 at 2.00 p.m.

Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.

Copy of the judgment be given dusty to counsel for both the parties.