Skip to main content

Can't proceed against the dead: Andhra HC to revenue wing

Justice AV Sesha Sai of the AP high court on Wednesday held that proceedings against a dead person are invalid and hence cannot be subjected to judicial scrutiny. He made this order while allowing a petition by city advocate R C Misra and set aside the proceedings launched by the Ranga Reddy district revenue authorities in the name of Erram Mallaiah in 2006 under sections 6 to 10 of the Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976. Mallaiah had died long before that.

The revenue wing's action in declaring Mallaiah as a holder of surplus land and initiating relevant proceedings against him after his death was invalid in the eyes of law, the judge said. Moreover, the authorities took up this exercise in the absence of the family members or legal representatives of Mallaiah, he said.

Petitioner Misra told the court that he had purchased a piece of land in Guttala Begumpet village in RR district in 1998. However, revenue authorities issued proceedings against the original owner in order to take possession of the 2.31 acres declaring it as surplus land on the grounds that the owner had failed to submit a declaration under the Land Ceiling Act.

The revenue department contended that the surplus land needs to be vested with the state and as the owner had sold the property after the Land Ceiling Act came into effect, he should have adhered to the Act. "We took possession of the land in 2008 only after due inquiry," the counsel for the state said.

After hearing both the parties, Justice Sesha Sai found that an enquiry conducted by the special officer under the land ceiling Act

had revealed that the original owner had died long ago. The judge then ruled that "in the present case, in spite of the report of the special enquiry officer informing the death of the original pattadar, the authorities, instead of restraining themselves from proceeding further, issued further proceedings and hence such orders cannot sustain for the judicial scrutiny."

Article referred:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/hyderabad/Cant-proceed-against-the-dead-HC-to-revenue-wing/articleshow/28567445.cms

Comments

Most viewed this month

Inherited property of childless hindu woman devolve onto heirs of her parents

In Tarabai Dagdu Nitanware vs Narayan Keru Nitanware, quashing an order passed by a joint civil judge junior division, Pune, the Bombay High Court has held that under Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, any property inherited by a female Hindu from her father or mother, will devolve upon the heirs of her father/mother, if she dies without any children of her own, and not upon her husband. Justice Shalini Phansalkar Joshi was hearing a writ petition filed by relatives of one Sundarabai, who died issueless more than 45 years ago on June 18, 1962. Article referred:http://www.livelaw.in/property-inherited-female-hindu-parents-shall-devolve-upon-heirs-father-not-husband-dies-childless-bombay-hc-read-judgment/

'Seize assets to pay damages to accident victim'

Her story might be an inspiration for the physically challenged but justice has remained elusive for her. In 2008, a bus accident left research engineer S Thenmozhi, 30, paraplegic. In April 2013, the motor accident claims tribunal directed the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation (TNSTC) to provide her a compensation of 57.9 lakh. However, TNSTC refused to budge and on Tuesday a city court ordered attaching of movable assets of the transport corporation. Thenmozhi was employed in C-DOT, a telecom technology development centre in Bangalore. On July 21, 2008, she was coming to Chennai in a private bus. Around 2am, the bus had a flat tyre and the driver parked it on the left side of the road near Pallikonda in Vellore district on the Bangalore-Chennai highway. While the tyre was being changed, a TNSTC bus of Dharmapuri division hit the stationary bus. The rear part of the bus was smashed and passengers were injured. Thenmozhi who had a seat at the back of the bus suffered...

Mumbai ITAT rules income of offshore discretionary trust is subject to tax in India

The Mumbai Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has recently determined the following issue in the affirmative in the case of Manoj Dhupelia: Should the income of an offshore discretionary trust be subject to tax in India, if no distributions have been made to beneficiaries in India? The question arose from appeals filed by individual beneficiaries in relation to a Lichtenstein-based trust, the Ambrunova Trust and Merlyn Management SA (the Trust) with the ITAT. It is important to note that the individuals in this case were amongst those first identified by the Government of India (GOI) as holding undeclared bank accounts in Lichtenstein. The ITAT ruling raises the following issues: Taxation of Trust Corpus: ITAT classified the corpus of the trust as "undisclosed income" and declared it taxable in the hands of the beneficiaries. Taxation of Undistributed Income: ITAT refused to draw a distinction between the corpus and undistributed income from the trust and declared i...