Smt. Shakuntala Tiwari vs. State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Held
The Court noted the submissions made by the counsel for the Development Authority. The Authority acknowledged an inadvertent oversight in processing the petitioner's case. They agreed to execute all required documents in favour of the petitioner, provided the petitioner deposited a minor balance amount of Rs. 2,761/- (towards lease rent, sanitary, and other expenses) and GST amounting to Rs. 7,485/-. The petitioner was also to complete all necessary formalities within 15 days. Upon fulfillment of these conditions, the registered sale deed would be executed. In view of these submissions and the agreement reached, the Court found that no further orders were required, and the petition was disposed of.
Facts
The petitioner, Smt. Shakuntala Tiwari, approached the High Court seeking a direction for the execution of a sale deed for a flat. Proceedings had been pending before the Competent Authority since 2021, and the petitioner had deposited the entire amount on October 26, 2023. The Court directed the Secretary of the Prayagraj Development Authority to be present. The Development Authority's counsel informed the Court that the matter was overlooked due to inadvertence. The Authority agreed to execute the necessary documents in favour of the petitioner, subject to the deposit of a minor balance amount of Rs. 2,761/- (for lease rent, sanitary, and other expenses) and GST of Rs. 7,485/-. The petitioner was to complete formalities within 15 days, after which the registered sale deed would be executed.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the respondent to execute the sale deed of a flat in favour of the petitioner, considering the pending proceedings and deposit of amounts. Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that proceedings had been pending since 2021 and the entire money was deposited on October 26, 2023, necessitating the execution of the sale deed. Respondent's Contention: The Development Authority submitted that the matter was overlooked due to inadvertence and agreed to execute the sale deed upon the deposit of a minor balance amount and GST, subject to the petitioner completing formalities within 15 days.
Sections Cited
12% GST
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208748-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT - C No. - 36589 of 2023 Petitioner :- Smt. Shakuntala Tiwari Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Yogesh Dutta Mishra,Manjulesh Kumar Shukla Counsel for Respondent :- CSC,Harsh Vardhan Gupta,Nagendra Pratap Singh Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker,Chief Justice Hon'ble Ashutosh Srivastava,J.
The petitioner has approached this Court seeking direction from the respondent to execute the sale deed of a flat.
According to the petitioner, proceedings were pending before the Competent Authority since, 2021 and he deposited the entire money on 26.10.2023. 3. Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances, this Court has directed the Secretary, Prayagraj Development Authority, Prayagraj to remain present before this Court.
Shri A. P. Paul, learned counsel for the Development Authority submits that the Secretary, Prayagraj Development Authority is present in the Court and inform this Court that it is due to inadvertent, the matter was overlooked. He submits that now the Development Authority has decided to execute all the documents as required in favour of the petitioner subject t
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.