Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Pankaj Mithal, Vipin Chandra Dixit, JJ.
Mata Deen Bhagwan Das And Ors. - Petitioner
Vs.
State Of U.P. And Ors. - Respondent
Writ -C No. 30353 of 2014
Decided On : 10-01-2020
Petitioners purchased land has been made available to charitable trust as possession and papers of land in dispute is in question – petitioner said to have purchased land from a lease – Charitable Trust has been granted freehold rights in the said portion of land and a freehold deed in its favour has been executed on being satisfied that its rights over it as claimed by it are not in doubt – Held, there is an inordinate and unexplained delay on part of the respondents in dealing with the application of the petitioners for grant of freehold rights – Since the respondents have executed freehold deed in favour of Charitable Trust that has purchased a small portion of the aforesaid plot from the petitioners, the petitioners are also entitled for freehold rights as on the aforesaid date and at the rate on which the rights were so conferred upon the said trust or in the alternatively to pay damages to the petitioners at the rate of difference between the circle rate prevailing as on date and that which has been applied for grant of freehold rights to the aforesaid trust –Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue a demand note to the petitioners by applying the same rate that had been applied for grant of freehold rights to the aforesaid Trust or the rate prevailing as on date and on petitioners depositing the said amount to execute the sale deed within a further period of one month from the date of deposit of the amount by the petitioners – Writ Petition allowed. (Paras 27, 28, 29)
Facts of Case:
petitioners purchased land has been made available to charitable trust as possession and papers of land in dispute is in question – petitioner said to have purchased land from a lease – Charitable Trust has been granted freehold rights in the said portion of land and a freehold deed in its favour has been executed on being satisfied that its rights over it as claimed by it are not in doubt.
Findings of Court:
Held, there is an inordinate and unexplained delay on part of the respondents in dealing with the application of the petitioners for grant of freehold rights – Since the respondents have executed freehold deed in favour of Charitable Trust that has purchased a small portion of the aforesaid plot from the petitioners, the petitioners are also entitled for freehold rights as on the aforesaid date and at the rate on which the rights were so conferred upon the said trust or in the alternatively to pay damages to the petitioners at the rate of difference between the circle rate prevailing as on date and that which has been applied for grant of freehold rights to the aforesaid trust –Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to issue a demand note to the petitioners by applying the same rate that had been applied for grant of freehold rights to the aforesaid Trust or the rate prevailing as on date and on petitioners depositing the said amount to execute the sale deed within a further period of one month from the date of deposit of the amount by the petitioners.
Result : Writ Petition allowed
JUDGMENT :
Heard Sri Swapnil Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Mata Prasad, learned Standing Counsel.
2. The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of the court for issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to execute a freehold deed in their favour in respect of the land plot No.71, Block No.79 (House No.79/75), Area 3213.76 Sq. Mtrs. situate in Bansmandi Kanpur, pursuant to their application dated 29.01.1999 for grant of freehold rights in the said land.
3. The petitioners at the same time have also prayed for the quashing of the Government Orders dated 04.03.2014 and 28.09.2011 and Clause 2(i) of the Government Order dated 15.01.2015 which provides for applying the circle rate prevailing on the date of disposal of the freehold application instead of the date of submitting the application.
4. The petitioners allege that in respect of Nazul land of plot No.71 aforesaid having an area of 3351.31 Sq. Mtrs. a lease deed was executed on 01.03.1897 for a period of 99 years in favour of Babu Murlidhar and two others. The said lease rights were inherited by Smt. Pranpati @ Kishan Rani, who transferred the said rights vide sale deed dated 03.02.2016 in favour of Lala Rang Lal and Ram Gopal. Later Ram Goptal vide sale deed dated 10.10.2017 purchased the entire rights in the said property and became the exclusive lessee of it.
5. The petitioners purchased the leasehold rights in the said property on 01.07.1921 from Ram Gopal. Ever-since then they are in actual physical possession of the aforesaid plot. However, the petitioners vide registered sale deed dated 29.01.1972 transferred their rights in a small portion of the said property to the extent of 137.55 Sq. Mtrs. in favour of Ganpat Rai Moti Ram Charitable Trust.
6. In view of the above, the petitioners remain to be the lease of 3213.76 Sq. Mtrs. of the said plot of land whereas the above Charitable Trust became the lessee of an area of 137.55 Sq. Mtrs. of it.
7. The State Government came out with a policy for converting Nazul land into freehold by issuing Government Orders from time to time and finally a Government Order dated 01.12.1998 was issued in this regard.
8. The petitioners in accordance with the terms and conditions of the aforesaid Government Order deposited 25% of the self-assessed market value of the said land amounting to Rs.7,35,182/-and submitted application dated 29.01.1999 for the grant of freehold rights in the aforesaid land of plot No.71 having an area 3213.76 Sq. Mtrs.
9. Simultaneously, vide application dated 30.01.1999 Ganpat Rai Moti Ram Charitable Trust also applied for grant of freehold rights in respect of 137.55 Sq. Mtrs. of the land of the aforesaid plot No.71 which it had purchased from the petitioners.
10. The Charitable Trust has been granted freehold rights in the said portion of land and a freehold deed in its favour has been executed on 29.03.2012 on being satisfied that its rights over it as claimed by it are not in doubt.
11. In regard to the application of the petitioners for grant of freehold rights, Additional District Magistrate (F & R) vide letter dated 20.01.2003 made certain inquiries with regard to the manner in which the petitioners have acquired rights in the above property. The petitioners in response to the said query supplied all documents pertaining to their title/leasehold rights over the said land.
12. Despite the above, the District Magistrate vide letter dated 05.12.2007 required the petitioners to produce all documents of their rights which were again produced before him on 02.01.2018 by the petitioners. Then certain clarifications were sought which were duly clarified by means of an affidavit submitted on 03.08.2010. Thereafter the petitioners were given personal hearing and they appeared on 26.10.2010 but the respondents failed to issue the demand letter for the balance amount so as to convert the land into freehold.
13. In the meantime pending the above proceedings a Government Ord
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
