THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY AND ANR. versus SMT. SUDHA PATIL AND ANR.

THE APPROPRIATE AUTHORITY AND ANR. versus SMT. SUDHA PATIL AND ANR.

The Appropriate Authority had duly considered relevant and germane materials and was justified in concluding undervaluation exceeding 15%; High Court erred in substituting its own conclusion for that of the Authority in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226, and its interference was unwarranted.

Parties
Appellant: The Appropriate Authority; Respondent (proposed Transferee): Smt. Sudha Patil; Respondent (transferor/owner of the Property): A.G. Krishna
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
10 November 1998
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Karnataka High Court, W.a. No. 1233 of 1996
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Judgment of the Karnataka High Court set aside; order of the Appropriate Authority affirmed; writ petition before the High Court dismissed.
Legal Topics
Property Purchase by Government, Undervaluation of Property, Compulsory Acquisition, Judicial Review Under Article 226
Income Tax Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Property Purchase by Government Undervaluation of Property Compulsory Acquisition Judicial Review Under Article 226

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Appropriate Authority

Appellant

Smt. Sudha Patil

Respondent (proposed Transferee)

A.G. Krishna

Respondent (transferor/owner of the Property)

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of Karnataka High Court, W.a. No. 1233 of 1996

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226 is enlarged where no appeal is provided against the order of the Appropriate Authority under Section 269-UD of the Income Tax Act
  2. 2 Whether the Appropriate Authority considered relevant and germane materials and discharged its burden in determining undervaluation for purposes of compulsory purchase under Section 269-UD

Ratio Decidendi

The Appropriate Authority had duly considered relevant and germane materials and was justified in concluding undervaluation exceeding 15%; High Court erred in substituting its own conclusion for that of the Authority in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 226, and its interference was unwarranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Judgment of the Karnataka High Court set aside; order of the Appropriate Authority affirmed; writ petition before the High Court dismissed.

Orders

  • Entire amount lying in deposit together with interest accrued thereon to be paid to the respondents.
  • No order as to costs.