Express Towers (P.) Ltd. vs Union of India

This civil miscellaneous application has been filed in the main writ petition after the said writ petition had been disposed of on 1-3-1993. The petitioner, Express Towers, in the writ petition was the purchaser of the property in question from the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the writ petition. The applicants in this CM. were respondent Nos. 4 and 5 in the writ petition and had entered into the agreement to sell the property in question on 21-5-1987. However, on an application by the purchaser (Express Towers) to the income tax authorities seeking permission for the sale, the Inspecting Commissioner of income tax vide order dated 10- 7-1987 decided that the property be acquired by the Central Government. The said order regarding acquisition of the property by the Central Government was challenged by way of this writ petition by Express Towers which was allowed by this Court by order dated 1-3-1993 and the order of the appropriate authority acquiring the property under the income tax Act, 1961 (''the Act'') was quashed. It appears that subsequently the property was re-auctioned by the income tax authorities on 17-9-1993. In the writ petition which was disposed of on 1-3-1993, the Court observed :

"Certain interim orders were passed regarding balance consideration to be paid to the seller. Learned counsel for the seller states that his client had got the payment late and he is entitled to interest. The seller is allowed to raise this point before the Appropriate Authority. There is hardly any need to mention that if any of the parties is aggrieved by the order of the Appropriate Authority in this regard, he can approach this Court, if so advised."

The above order passed in writ petition shows that the owners of the property (petitioners in this CM.) were granted leave to agitate their claim for interest on account of delayed payment before the appropriate authority and in case of rejection of their claim, they could approach this Court.

We have gone through the subsequent order dated 26-5-1993, passed by the income tax authorities again acquiring the property and we do not find that any question was raised by the applicants regarding interest before the appropriate authority, as directed by the Court in the writ petition. The learned counsel for the applicant relied on Annexure A filed along with rejoinder to the present application, which is a notice issued by the owners, through advocate, to the income tax authority on 31-10- 1995 and to an earlier letter sent by the owners on 4-8-1993 and the subsequent reminders. In the notice dated 31-10-1995, the owners through their advocate had called upon the appropriate authority to satisfy their demand for interest within two weeks, failing which they would be constrained to take appropriate legal action. But this letter of 1995 was sent subsequent to the fresh order of acquisition. Even the letter dated 4-8-1993 was sent after the fresh order was passed on 26-5-1993. It has to be noted that till today, the applicants/owners, have not filed any independent action (suit or writ) for recovery of interest. They have chosen to file this miscellaneous application in the writ petition, which was deposed of vide order dated 1-3-1993. The writ petition was filed by Express Towers being the person aggrieved by the first order of acquisition dated 29-7-1992 passed by the income tax authorities. There is no evidence to show that the owners claim for interest was raised before the authorities before the second order for acquisition dated 26-5-1993. Even assuming that the demand of interest was raised by an application in August 1993 and no relief was granted to the applicants by the Authorities, the petitioner ought to have initiated an independent legal action rather than file this CM. in the CWP, which was disposed of on 1-3-1993. The application is, accordingly, dismissed.