The sale deeds executed before the cutoff date establish ownership regardless of subsequent registration, entitling the petitioners to exemption from acquisition.

ORDER :

N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.

The issue involved in both these writ petitions are common and hence, both the writ petitions are heard and disposed of through this common order.

2. The petitioners have approached this Court challenging the impugned memorandum dated 19.06.2023 and also for a consequential direction to the third respondent to issue 'No Objection Certificate' to the petitioners to the effect that the subject property is exempted from the proceedings initiated under the Tamil Nadu Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1978 (for brevity, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') in line with the proceedings of the third respondent dated 19.04.1983.

3. The case of the petitioners is that one Sundara Swamigal was the urban land owner and he owned a vacant land measuring 9.54 acres in S.No.7/3 of Saravanampatty Village, Coimbatore. He converted the land into a layout by sub-dividing it into 148 plots and it was named as "Deeviga Nagar". Insofar as W.P.No.32510 of 2024 is concerned, vacant plots were purchased by the husband of the first petitioner and father of second and third petitioners through a registered sale deed dated 31.07.1976. Insofar as W.P.No.3916 of 2024, vacant plots were purchased by the husband of the first petitioner and father of second and third petitioners, through a registered sale deed dated 31.07.1976. These sale deeds were registered as Document Nos.3077 and 3078 of 1979 on 15.10.1979.

4. In the meantime, proceedings were initiated under the Act against the urban land owner in the year 1970 for owning urban land in excess of the ceiling limit. The third respondent is the competent authority who was empowered to conduct the proceedings. After a detailed enquiry, the third respondent passed an order dated 19.04.1983 under Section 9(5) of the Act. As per this order, the third respondent determined the extent of property that was sold prior to 03.08.1976 (crucial date) as 16490 M². The third respondent also determined the extent of land sold by the Urban Land Owner as on 03.08.1976 as 22117 M². After considering the various objections, the third respondent determined the total excess land as 12385 M². Apart from that, the third respondent also determined an extent of 7372 M² towards roads.

5. The above order passed by the third respondent became final and the land that was purchased by the petitioners did not fall within the surplus lands as was determined by the third respondent. Therefore, the petitioners were seeking for a 'No Objection Certificate' to the effect that the plots owned by the petitioners is exempted from the Urban Land proceedings.

6. The third respondent has filed a counter-affidavit. The third respondent has taken a stand that the petitioners are the subsequent purchasers of the property which was already acquired and therefore, the very purchase of the property is null and void as per Section 6 of the Act. That apart, even though the sale deed is dated 31.07.1976, the registration was done only on 15.10.1979 and therefore, the effect of such sale will take place only from 15.10.1979 by which time the land was already acquired. The third respondent has also taken a stand that the portion of the land purchased by the petitioners was not included in the excluded portion and therefore, the petitioners cannot take advantage of the proceedings of the third respondent dated 19.04.1983. Since the proceedings of the third respondent has become final, the petitioners cannot question the same and the petitioners are not entitled for 'No Objection Certificate' and accordingly, the third respondent has sought for the dismissal of the writ pe