This has been a question that is hardly discussed in some real-estate blogs, however we find it absolutely necessary to throw some light on this issue from the legal point of view.
The State of TamilNadu has the rights to aquire lands based on the proposal of the TamilNadu Housing Board (TNHB) for implementing various housing schemes. After the aquisition proceedings are over, possesion of the lands are handed over to the Board and the lands plotted out and sold to the various individuals as per the scheme.
There are two modes of sale for TNHB plots and they are :
1. An outright purchase or sale.
2. By execution of lease cum sale agreement, wherein the buyers are entitled to make the sale consideration in instalments.
The Board passes an order of provisional allotment determining the value of the plot alloted. There are instances when, after the provisional allotment of plots, the compensation for land aquisition is disputed. In such cases, What is the status of the TNHB plot owner? Will he/she protected from such disputes and can he/she impleaded in the case in order to protect hir/her interests?
In a particular case ((2006) 4 MLJ 558 (Mad)), the land owners whose lands were aquired were not satisfied with the quantum of compensation. They had approached the Land Aquisition Officer and subsequently reached the District & Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court). An application was filed at the instance of the board to implead itself as a necessary party, which was allowed.
The TamilNadu Housing Board Residents` Welfare Association filed a petition to implead the Association as a party in the said suit. The Court rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner is not a necessary party and the beneficiary viz., the TamilNadu Housing Board is already added as a Party. Aggrieved by the said order, a revision petition was filed by the Association in the High Court.
A combined reading of the various provisions of the Land aqusition act would indicate that a "person interested" in the land could be even an owner or occupier, who is entitled to receive the compensation. The court held that the Association is undoubtedly a person interested as contemplated by the provisions of the Land Aquisition Act.
This view accords with the principles of equity, justice and good conscience. How can it be said that a person for whose benefit the land is aquired and who is to pay the compensation is not a person interested eventhough its stake may be extremely vital? For instance, the land aqusition proceedings may be held to be invalid and thus a person concerned is completely deprived of the benefit, which is given to him.
Similarly, if such a person is not heard by the Collector or the Court, he may have to pay a very heavy compensation. In case he is allowed to appear before a court, he could have satisfied it that the compensation was far too heavy having regard to the nature and extent of the land. Such a person is vitally interested both in the title to the property as also in the compensation to be paid. The Court held that the TNHB flat owners Association is undoubtedly a person interested as contemplated by the provisions of the Act.
- Courtesy : www.metroplots.com Your Favourite Property Portal for Buying, Selling, Rental & Lease of Commercial and Residential Property in and around Chennai.
- For more Articles on properties in Chennai please visit : www.metroplots.com
- Email : anand@metroplots.com
No comments:
Post a Comment