Back
High Court Of Delhi
DEV RAJ GUPTA - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Civil 2039 of 1988
Decided On : 09/14/1989
LAND USE - CONVERSION CHARGES - CALCULATION - DATE OF APPLICATION FOR CONVERSION - MISUSE CHARGES - CHANGE OF LAND USE BY MASTER PLAN - INTEREST ON UNPAID CHARGES - VALID DEMAND - DELHI DEVELOPMENT ACT, 1957 - SECTION 14.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the demand for commercialisation and other charges by the respondent for a multi-storeyed commercial building constructed on a plot of land leased by the Government. The lease deed contained clauses restricting the use of the land to residential purposes. The petitioners applied for conversion of land use to commercial in 1978, after the Master Plan designated the area as commercial. The respondents demanded conversion charges based on rates prevalent in 1981, misuse charges for using the property for commercial purposes, and interest on unpaid charges.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the conversion charges should be calculated based on rates prevalent on the date of application for conversion, which was 15th February 1978, and not on the rates in 1981. The court also held that misuse charges could not be levied as the change of land use to commercial by the Master Plan superseded the terms of the lease deed. The court further held that interest could not be charged on unpaid charges since the demand was not valid due to the incorrect calculation of conversion charges.
Issues: 1. Whether the conversion charges should be calculated based on rates prevalent on the date of application for conversion or on the rates prevalent at the time of demand. 2. Whether misuse charges can be levied for using the property for commercial purposes when the Master Plan designated the area as commercial. 3. Whether interest can be charged on unpaid charges when the demand was not valid.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court relied on its earlier decision in Daya Wanti Punj v. New Delhi Municipal Committee, AIR 1982 Delhi 534, which held that the relevant date for calculating commercialisation charges is the date on which the application for conversion was first made. 2. The court relied on its decision in Smt Kamla Bakshi and others v. Union of India and another, AIR 1987 Delhi 380, which held that the terms of a lease deed must yield to any statutory provision enacted subsequently, and that the Master Plan and Zonal Plan superseded the terms of the lease deed requiring the property to be used for residential purposes. 3. The court held that interest could not be charged on unpaid charges since the demand was not valid due to the incorrect calculation of conversion charges.
Final Decision: The court quashed the impugned decisions of the respondents and directed them to recompute the additional premium and other charges payable by the petitioners in accordance with law and the court's observations within six months.
( 1 ) THE challenge in this writ petition is to the letter dated 12th June, 1987 whereby the respondent No. 2 has demanded commercialisation and other charges from the petitioners in respect of the multistoreyed commercial building, which has been constructed at 20, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi.
( 2 ) BRIEFLY stated the facts are that the aforesaid plot of land by virtue of a perpetual lease deed dated, 17th November, 1981 was given to Smt. Rama Bai wife of Dr. Tulsi-Ramby the Governor General in Council. Clause 2 (5) and Clause 2 (6), which are relevant. of the said letter read as under: - "2 (5) The Lessee will not without the previous consent in writing of the Chief Commissioner of Delhi or such officer as the Lessor or the Chief Commissioner, Delhi may authorise in this behalf erect or suffer to be erected on any part of the said demised premises any buildings other than and except the building erected, thereon at the date of these presents. 2 (9) The Lessee Will not without such consent as aforesaid carry on or permit to be carried on the said premises any trade or business whatsoever or use the same or permit the same to be used for any purpose other than that of a residence or do or suffer to be done thereon any act or thing whatsoever which in the opinion of the Chief Commissioner of Delhi may be an annoyance or disturbance to the Governor General in Council or his tenants in the New Capital of Delhi. "
( 3 ) THE said Smt, Rama Bai constructed a residential building on the said plot. Then this property was sold on 20tb May. 1938 to Smt. Leela Wati wife of late Shri Gulraj Gupta. On the death of Smt. Leela Wati the said property devolved on petitioners No. I to 4 and late Shri Hans Raj Gupta. It is alleged that Shri Hans Raj Gupta was the Karta of the Joint Hindu Family and petitioners No. 6 to 9 were his sons and co-parteners. It is not necessary to refer to devolution of the property after the death of Shri Hans Raj Gupta.
( 4 ) AS is evident from hereinabove, the building which was constructed was meant to be used for residential purpose. It appears that the Master Plan was framed and according to the Master Plan this area in question including 24 Barakhamba Road, New Delhi was notified as being a part of the commercial zone and the land used was to be for commercial purpose. The Master Plan came in operation on 1st September, 1962.
( 5 ) ON 25th April. 1977, Shri Prem Shanker Khandelwal, Advocate, wrote a letter to the Land and Development Officer on behalf of petitioner No 1. It was stated in the said letter that petitioner No. 1 proposes to construct a multi- storeyed building on the aforesaid plot of land and he may be informed as to what use the charges payable for conversion of the land use. A reply to this letter were received by letter dated 29th July, 1977. In the said reply. it was stated that the request of the petitioner s counsel was receiving attention.
( 6 ) IT seems that an application had been filed in the office of the Land and Development for mutation of the property, on the death of Smt. Leela Wati, in the name of her heirs. Vide memorandum dated 21st November, 1977, the property in question was mutated in the name of petitioners No. 1 to 4 and late Shri Hans Raj Gupta. Soon thereafter, on 15th 301 February, 1978, late Shri Hans Raj Gupta, for and on behalf of himself, Sbri Dev Raj Gupta and others wrote the following letter :- "under the Master Plan and the Zonal Plan the above plot now residential can be developed for the construction of a Commercial Building. Please let me know your terms in respect thereof together with commercialisation charges that will have to be paid by us. The plans have already been submitted to the N. D. M C. after their approval by the Urban and Acts Commission. "
( 7 ) IT appears that a letter dated 1st March, 1980 was sent by the Office of the Land and Development Officer to the owners. In this letter, which is stated to have been received by the petitio
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
