B. N. KIRPAL, J. (Oral)

( 1 ) THE short question which arises for consideration in this case is whether the land which was purchased by the respondent in an auction from the Delhi Development Authority can be subjected to property tax or not.

( 2 ) ON 12th March, 1982 the D. D. A. held an auction in respect of Plot No. 6, Asaf All Road, New Delhi. The auction was of lease hold rights and the respondent herein was the highest bidder. The possession of the land was taken by the respondent after its bid had been accepted, on 5th May, 1982. In August, 1982 a formal lease deed was executed by the D. D. A. in favour of the respondent.

( 3 ) IT appears that a notice under Section 126 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act was issued to the respondent to show cause why the property tax should not be levied under the said Act. Reply to the same was Sled but by order dated 27th November, 1984 the property was ordered to be subjected to tax. The contention of the respondent that no tax is leviable was not accepted.

( 4 ) THE respondent filed an appeal to the Addl. District Judge challenging its liability to pay the tax. The Add1. District Judge referred the provision of Section 120 (c) of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act and noted that the urea in which the land was situated, had not been declared as a developed area and secondly, the building plans of the respondent had not been passed and, therefore, no property tax could be levied. The Addl. District Judge held that the perusal of the Act showed that the respondent was not a person primarily liable for the payment of property tax, in as much as the land in question had not been transferred to it with the right to let within a period of ten years. The Addl District Judge by his order dated 31st August, 1985, therefore, set aside the levy of property tax on the said plot in respect of the assessment years 1982-83 and 1983-84.

( 5 ) BEING aggrieved the present writ petition has been filed by the Corporation.

( 6 ) ON behalf of the Corporation it has been vehemently urged before me that looking at the definition of "land" under Section 2 (24) of the Act, the respondent is the owner of the leasehold rights and because of the relevant provisions of the lease deed the respondent can transfer his rights therein with the permission of the D. D. A. Therefore, the provision of Section 120 (1) (c) are applicable and the land can be subjected to property tax. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, during the assessment years in question, neither the building plans had been passed nor had the construction on the plot in question been undertaken.

( 7 ) IN the present case we are concerned with the provision of Section 120 of the Act. The said section reads as follows :-

"120. (1) The property taxes shall be primarily leviable as follows :-

(A) if the land or building is let, upon the lessor ;

(B) if the land or building is sub-let, upon the superior lessor ;

(C) if the land or building is unlet, upon the person in whom the right to let same vests. Provided that the property taxes in respect of land or building, being property of the Union, possession of which has been delivered in pursuance of section 20 of the Displaced Persons (Compensation. and Rehabilitation) Act, 1954, shall be primarily leviable upon the transferee.

(2) If any land has been let for a term exceeding one year to a tenant and such tenant has built upon the land, the property taxes assessed in respe ;t of that l?nd and the building erected thereon shall be primarily leviable upon the said tenant, whether the land and building are in the occupation of such tenant or a sub-tenant of such tenant. Explanation :-The term "tenant" includes any person deriving title to the land or the building erected upon such land from tie tenant whether by operation of law or by transfer inter vivos.

(3) The liability of the several owners of any building which is, or purports to be, severaly owned in parts or flats or rooms

Click Here to Read the rest of this document