Back
PANKAJ NAQVI, PIYUSH AGRAWAL
Sushil Kumar Nagrath – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Heard Sri Rohan Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri M.C. Chaturvedi, the learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Shivam Yadav for respondent no.2 and the learned standing counsel for the State.
The moot issue involved in this petition is as to whether NOIDA is empowered to levy transfer charges on conveyance executed by its lessees / sub-lessees.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner has challenged the levy principally on the ground that it has no statutory flavour as also the lease deed dated 29.1.1990 contains no such power or authority to levy transfer charges in respect of subsequent conveyances. He places reliance on the decisions of the Apex Court in Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra and Another, (2011) 13 SCC 497 and Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited and another vs. State of Bihar and another, (2018) 12 SCC 107.
2. The learned Senior Counsel for the respondent – authority opposed the submission on the ground that levy of transfer charge is not a tax but a fee which the authority is empowered to collect under the terms of the lease deed dated 29.1.1990.
3. A lease deed dated 29.1.1990 was executed by NOIDA (lessor), an authority constituted und
Point of law: Power to the Authority in respect of transfer of land. -The Authority may sell, lease of otherwise transfer whether by auction, allotment or otherwise any land or building belonging to ....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the transfer of lease under the Government Grants Act should be treated as an assignment of a lease and not a conveyance, and the stamp dut....
The court upheld the validity of charges for transfer of property as stipulated in the Lease Deeds, emphasizing the importance of contractual obligations and the authority's right to fix charges for ....
Housing society lease premiums capped by Section 79A directions; excess demands not enforceable 'dues'; membership grantable on statutory compliance despite conditional prior consent letter.
Development charges for nazul land must be assessed and determined at the time of granting permission, and any subsequent demand based on later government resolutions is not legally valid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the authority to levy development charges must be in existence at the time of granting permission, and the recovery of the amount of premium o....
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
