Allahabad Bank vs State Of West Bengal & Ors

A brief reference to the background facts as projected by appellant would be necessary.

Appellant-Bank entered into an agreement with respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the year 1990 for purchase of land and building situated at No.1 Fakirpara Road, Calcutta. The consideration was fixed at Rs.20 lacs. Out of the said amount Rs.19,00,000/- was paid to the vendors-respondent Nos. 4-5. The possession of the property was handed over to the appellant-Bank with the right to demolish the existing structures and to construct building thereon. Another agreement was entered into on 12.11.1990. By this agreement respondent No.5 was appointed as contractor/developer to construct a multi-storied building of 29 residential flats at the property in question. The said flats were constructed by spending more than rupees one crore six lacs. The building was constructed in terms of the plan sanctioned by Calcutta Municipal Corporation and possession was given to the Bank in 1992. All the flats were allotted and are in occupation of the allottees. When the constructions were going on, the appellant-Bank sent a draft copy of the sale deed to respondent No. 4 for finalisation and for execution and registration of the sale deed. There was no response to the request made by the appellant-Bank. The prayer for permission to sell was rejected by the Competent Authority under the Urban Ceiling and Regulation Act, 1976 (in short the 'Act'). An appeal was filed which was dismissed by holding that the property in question vested with the Government and was in fact the excess land of the owners. It was categorically held by the order dated 20.3.1996 that the Competent Authority was right in treating the land in question to be taken into account while determining the total excess vacant land. However, liberty was granted to the appellant to move the State Government for seeking exemption. According to the appellant, after the said order the State Government was moved in terms of the directions given by the Appellate Authority on 2nd September, 1996, 13th March, 1997, 20th April, 2001 and 18th May, 2002. According to appellant-Bank since no action was taken on the applications, it was compelled to file writ petition before the High Court which summarily rejected it on the ground that it was filed after seven years.

(b) where any person holds vacant land in excess of the ceiling limit and the State Government, either on its own motion or otherwise, is satisfied that the application of the provisions of this Chapter would cause undue hardship to such person, that Government may by order exempt, subject to such conditions, if any, as may be specified in the order, such vacant land from the provisions of this Chapter;

Provided that no order under this clause shall be made unless the reasons for doing so are recorded in writing."

It is not really necessary to examine whether these provisions have any application. The impugned order shows that the High Court has not examined that aspect. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to High Court for fresh consideration on merits. This order, however, shall not stand in the way of the official respondents in considering the prayer made by the appellant-Bank.

The appeal is accordingly disposed of with no orders as to costs.