Transfer of trust property

My grandfather has created a trust for the construction and running of a school. He had appointed my father as trustee. My grandfather died in the year 1974. My father dies in the year 2015. This trust is created by a Will, according to it I am the trustee of this trust but I came to know that my father has transferred this right and appointed Mr X as trustee. It is a private trust and father has no right to appoint another person as trustee. I have filed a civil suit, which is the possibility to win.

According to section 6 of the trust act, trust can be created by a will. Difference between private trust and public trust is depending upon the character of a person whose benefit the trust is created.

For the private trust the beneficiaries are defined and ascertained individuals who within a definite time can be defined. When the beneficiaries are the uncertain and fluctuating body of person either the public at large it is called public trust.

In private trust beneficial interest is vested absolutely in one or more individual who is or within certain time may be ascertained. Your grandfather had created a trust for the benefits of society; the object of the trust is to serve society. All the students of the school are the beneficiaries of the trust thus it is a public trust.

If the right to appoint a trustee is not given by the Will hence the appointment of a new trustee by your father is invalid. In Sri Dhar vs Mahant Manohar Das OC 236: it is held by the High Court of Allahabad that appointment of a new trustee is void if such right to appointment is not given by the author.

Your father has no authority to appoint any other person as a trustee on his place. In exigency, a new trustee may be appointed with the permission of the court. Trusty is like a manager or a guardian of an infant and not that of the owner to entertain a right which is not authorized by the author.

It cannot be said that what will be the decision of your case, but you have sufficient evidence to prove that appointment of the new trustee is void.

Cancellation of allotment

I have booked a flat in a housing project constructed by the Lucknow Development Authority. I have deposited booking amount and the flat is allotted in my name. Thereafter LDA gave me 30 days to deposit 25% of the total value of the property which is also deposited in time. Due to some financial crisis, I could not deposit the remaining amount in time even after receiving a notice.

But I have deposited all the reaming amount with a penalty but it is refused by the concerned officer of the LDA. This is an illegal act because I have priority above any other person and my consideration must be accepted by the LDA.

It is important to understand the terms and conditions of the agreement that you signed with the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) at the time of booking the flat. If the agreement specifies a timeline for payment of the remaining amount, then the LDA is within their rights to refuse the payment made after the due date, even with a penalty.

However, it is also important to note that the LDA cannot act outside the scope of the agreement and refuse your payment without any valid reason. In case the LDA has acted unlawfully, you can file a complaint with the appropriate authorities or approach a lawyer for legal advice.

It is advisable to communicate with the LDA and understand the reason behind their refusal to accept the payment. If the reason is not justified or the LDA has acted unlawfully, then you can take legal action. If the reason is valid, you can try to negotiate with the LDA for an extension or an alternate solution.

In any case, it is important to maintain all the records and documentation related to the transaction and seek legal advice before taking any action.

In the case of property allotment, simply being allotted a property does not give the allottee the right to claim ownership. The allottee must adhere to all the rules set by the authority regarding the completion of the sale. It is unclear from the question whether the time period for payment of the due amount was extended by the authority or whether the payment was made in accordance with any rule set by the authority.

Depositing due amount without authority's offer is not allowed. Sometimes, the authority may offer to deposit the due amount with a penalty, but this does not create the right to deposit any due amount without such an offer.

In the case of Ravi Gautam vs State of U.P. AIR 2015, the Allahabad High Court held that the conditions of allotment with respect to the deposit of the balance amount must be strictly followed within the given time. Otherwise, the letter of allotment would be automatically canceled, and the allottee cannot claim any right to continue with the allotment subject to the payment.

Strict adherence to rules is required. It is not possible to claim that an offer was made by the authority in respect of due payment with a fine. In the case of R. D. Shetty vs International Airport Authority AIR 1979, the Supreme Court held that if a public authority has laid down certain norms and conditions regarding allotment, the applicant must strictly follow them. This was reiterated by the Supreme Court in Post Master General vs Tutu Das AIR 2007.

Based on the above discussion, it is clear that as an allottee, one does not have the right to compel the authority to accept payment of the due amount in the absence of any offer or scheme by the authority. It is essential to follow all the rules set by the authority regarding the completion of the sale, including the deposit of the balance amount within the stipulated time.

Consumer forum case is dismissed in default

I have filed a case before the consumer forum but due to nonappearance in the hearing, my case is dismissed by the forum. Can I file another case before the consumer forum or file an appeal before the state consumer forum.

Your case is dismissed for default. According to Order 9 Rule 9(1) of the code of civil procedure when the plaintiff is absent at the time of hearing of the case and suit is dismissed in default of the plaintiff, a second suit on the same cause of action would not lie because it is barred by order 9 rule 8 of the code of civil procedure.

Above mentioned provision is not made in the consumer protection rule thus subsequent case on the same cause of action is not barred by the consumer forum rules. Whenever rules of consumer forum are silent on any point of law and further action is necessary for the disposal of the case the consumer forum is bound to take the assistance of the code of civil procedure. In this condition provision made in order 9 rule, 9 and 8 will be applicable in the proceeding before the consumer forum.

In New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs R. Srinivasan (2000) 3 SCC  it is held by the supreme court of India that Order 9 Rule 9(1) & Order 9 Rule 8 do not apply in the proceeding before the consumer forum because the case was not decided on the merit and it is dismissed in default on the non-appearance of the party, therefore, it would be permissible to file a second complaint on the same cause of action explaining why the earlier complaint could not be pursued and was dismissed in default.

Therefore you can file the second complaint on the same cause of action and it would be admitted by the forum if it satisfies that you had a valid reason for non-appearance in the previous case which was dismissed in default.

Breach of contract

एक आदमी ने एक कंपनी ज्वाइन की जिसके अपॉइंटमेंट लेटर में एक क्लोज था :-

“You are expected to promote and expand the business of the company. you will not directly or indirectly, either solely or jointly, engage in any service or other business or profession whether during or, after the hours of employment without written sanction from the company”

नौकरी के दौरान उस आदमी ने एक सर्विस प्रदान करने बाली कंपनी अपनी पत्नी और ससुर को निदेसक बनाते हुए बनाई! उसके बाद उस कंपनी का कॉन्ट्रैक्ट उस कंपनी में करा दिया जहाँ पर वो खुद कार्य करता था ! उसने आपने सीनियर को इस संबध में जानकारी नहीं दी ! परन्तु सभी नियम और कायदे कानून का पूरी तरह से पालन किया तथा किसी प्रकार का घपला नहीं किया नियमानुसार जिस प्रकार बाकि सर्विस प्रदान करने बाली कम्पनियो को काम दिया जाता था उसी प्रकार वो अपनी कंपनी को भी कुछ काम देने लगा और इसमें उसने कोई भी पकछपात अपनी कंपनी के साथ नहीं किया तथा उस कंपनी ने भी दिए गए काम को पूरी निष्ठा के साथ पूरी ईमानदारी के साथ बिना किसी शिकायत के पूरा किया जिसको अलग अलग विभागों नें प्रतिएक बार चेक किया तथा सही पाया! जिसमें उस आदमी का कोई भी interfere नहीं था ! अब सवाल ये हैं की – 

१. उस आदमी को क्या सजा हो सकती है.

२. क्या वो आदमी धारा ४२० का दोषी होगा.

३. क्या उसकी कंपनी के डायरेक्टर्स को भी दोषी माना जायेगा

४. जो contract ब्रेक हुआ उसके लिए किया दण्ड हो सकता है !

५. क्या अग्रिम जमानत की आव्यसक्ता होगी.

६. यदि हो तो कोई रेफरेंस केस भी बताएं

कार्य की संविदा के अनुसार आपको कारबार के विस्तार और प्रसार के लिए कार्य करना था और प्रत्यक्ष या अप्रत्यक्ष रूप से किसी भी सेवा और कारबार में बिना लिखित पूर्व अनुमति के नहीं लगना था। इसके अनुसार आपको किसी अन्य सेवा में लगने से रोका गया था। संविदा के अनुसार आपको उक्त निर्देश दिया गया था जिसका पालन आपके द्वारा करना था।

आपके और आपके नियोक्ता के बीच अभिकरण का सम्बन्ध था। संविदा विधि में कुछ सिद्धांत बताया गया है जिसके अनुसार यदि अभिकरण में स्वामी और अभिकर्ता के बीच सम्बन्धो को विस्तार से विरचित नहीं किया गया है तो वहां पर संविदा विधि का नियम लागु होगा।

धारा २११ के अनुसार अभिकर्ता को अपने स्वामी के निर्देशों का पालन करना चाहिए यदि निर्देश नहीं दिया गया है तो व्यापर के प्रथाओं के अनुसार कार्य करना चाहिए। धार २१५ के अनुसार अभिकर्ता को अपने स्वं के लेखे से व्यापर नहीं करना चाहिए यदि अभिकर्ता ऐसा करता है तो उसे अपने मालिक का सम्मति से ऐसा करना चाहिए। यदि अभिकर्ता ऐसा करता है तो धारा २१६ के अनुसार मालिक को अधिकार है की वो उस फायदे को अभिकर्ता से वापस ले ले।

आपके मामले के तथ्यों के अनुसार आपने अपने पत्नी और स्वसुर के नाम पर एक कंपनी बनाया था। आप उसमे किसी भी प्रकार से शामिल नहीं थे। लेकिन आपका छिपा हुआ हित था। यद्यपि आपने कंपनी के साथ अपने लेखे कोई व्यापार नहीं किया। कंपनी का पृथक विधिक अस्तित्व होता है जिस कारण से ये नहीं कहा जा सकता की आपने अपने लेखे से व्यापार किया था। इसलिए आपको कंपनी को ये बात बताने की आयश्यकता नही थी की आप स्वयं अपने कंपनी के साथ व्यापार कर रहे थे।

आप अपने मलिक के नॉर्देशो का पालन करते हुए कंपनी के साथ संविदा किया . इस संविदा में अंतिम निर्णय लेने का अधिकार आपके पास नही था . उसे विभ्हिन्न चरणो पर अनुसमर्थन किया गया I पन्ना लाल बनाम मोहनलाल AIR 1961 SC में सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने निर्णीत किया था की यदि किसी अभिकर्ता के स्वयं के लेखे से मलिक को नुकसान होता है तो मलिक को अधिकार है की वो उस नुकसान को अभिकर्ता से वापस वसूल ले . यदि अभिकर्ता ने मलिक के निर्देशो का पालन करते हुए अपने अभिकरण के कारबार के तहत कार्य किया है तो फिर मलिक किसी नुकसान को प्राप्त करने का अधिकार नही रखता है.

संविदा के अनुसार आपको कोई निर्देश नही दिया गया था की आप किसी परिचित को कारया नही देंगे जिसके लाभ में आपका हित हो . कंपनी चाहे आपके पत्नी के नाम था लेकिन उसका अपना अलग विधिक व्यक्तित्वा होता है इसलिए ये नही कहा जा सकता की उसके लाभ में आपका हित था क्यो की उसला लाभ कंपनी के निदेशक और अंश धारक को होता है . ना तो आप कंपनी में अंश धारक हैं और ना ही निदेश तो आपको कंपनी के फयडे में हिस्सा लेने का अधिकार नही है.

यदि अभिकर्ता को कोई लाभ हुआ है तो उसे मलिक को वापस करना होगा ये सिद्धांत सर्व्यापी नही है . इसके भी कुछ सिद्धांत हैं, मलिक को साबित करना होगा की अभिकर्ता के स्वयं के लेखे से व्यापार करने से मलिक को नुकसान उठना पड़ा . ये नुकसान अभिकर्ता के किसी सरवन तथ्य को जानबूझ कर छिपाने के कारण हुआ.

आपके मामले मैं आपके द्वारा ठेके देने से कंपनी को कोई नुकसान नही हुआ . कंपनी ये सवित नही कर सकता की आपने उस ठको से अवैध रूप से कोई फायदा उठाया है . धारा २३८ के अनुसार कंपनी को अधिकार है की वो अभिकर्ता से कपट (fraud) या दुर्व्यापदेसन (misrepresentation) से प्रभावित संविदा को समाप्त कर दे.

कपट अपराधिक और सिविल दोनो प्रकार का होता है . संविदा विधि के धारा १७ में कपाट को परिभासित किया गया है जिसके अनुसार संविदा का एक पक्षकार प्रवंचना करने के आशय से संविदा करता है और असत्य बात को सत्य के रूप में बताता है तो वह कपट माना जायेगा . ये सिविल प्रकृति का कपट है और संविदा विधि के अनुसार मालिक नुकसान पाने का हक़दार होता है वो अपराधिक मामला दायर नहीं कर सकता.

आपके मामले के अनुसार आपने कभी भी अपने पत्नी की कंपनी को ग़लत तरीके से पचारित नही किया ताकि अपने मलिक से संविदा किया जा सके . यदि आपका मलिक ये सविट करता है की अपने पत्नी की कंपनी से संविदा करने के लिए आपने कंपनी के तात्विक तथ्यों के बारे में झूठ बोला या छुपाया तब कहा जा सकता है की आपने संविदा विधि के तहत कपट किया इसलिए संविदा को भंग कर देना चाहिए.

अपराधिक विधि में कपट को धारा ४१५ में परिभाषित किया गया है जिसके अनुसार यदि कोई व्यक्ति जानबूझ कर किसी व्यक्ति को प्ररित करता है की वो कोई संपत्ति किसी व्यक्ति को देदे या कोई कारया करे जो उत्परेरित नही किया गया होता तो नही करता और इस्परकार संपाति देने या कारया करने से उसे शारीरिक, मानसिक, प्रतिष्ठा या संपत्ति का हानि होता है . धारा ४२० के तहत अपराध के लिए आवश्यक है की उत्परेरणा और क्षति में परस्पर संबंध हो, और यदि उत्प्रेरित नहीं किया गया होता तो क्षति भी नहीं हुआ होता.

आपके मामले में आपने ना तो उत्परेरित किया और नही आपके कार्य से कंपनी को कोई हानि हुआ तो इस्प्रकार धारा ४२० में कोई अपराध नही बनता है .Rajesh Bajaj vs State of NCT Delhi AIR (1999) SC 1216 सर्वोच्च न्यायालय ने निर्णीत किया है की यदि ये साबित नही होता की –

  1. अभियुक्त के प्रवंचनापूर्ण कार्य से कार्य करने के लिए उत्प्रेरित किया था 
  2. अभियुक्त ने ये कार्य अपने को सदोष लाभ और किसी को सदोष हानि कारित करने के लिए किया था
  3. और मामला सिविल प्रकृति का है तो धारा ४२० के तहत अभियोजन को समाप्त (quash) कर दिया जाएगा . अतः उपरोक्त चर्चा से ये निष्कर्ष निकलता है की आपके खिलाफ ना तो सिविल और ना ही दणडिक मामला बनता है . क्योकी –

१. आपने कभी भी मलिक को उत्परेरित नही किया

२. आपने कोई सदोष लाभ अर्जित नही किया

३. मलिक को कोई नुकसान करित नही हुआ

४. कंपनी के बारे में कभी दुर्व्यापदेशन नही किया

५. निर्णय लेने का अंतिम अधिकार आपके पास नही था

६. आपके पत्नी की कंपनी को आपके कारण कोई विशेष लाभ नही हुआ

७. ठेके लेने में सामानया प्रक्रिया अपनाया गया

८. कोई विशेष लाभ या कोई आंतरिक सूचना आपके पत्नी की कंपनी को नही दिया गया

९. मलिक को ना तो मानसिक, शारीरिक, प्रतिष्ठा या संपत्ति का कोई नुकसान करित हुआ

यदि आपके खिलाफ धारा ४२० में प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट दर्ज कराया जाता है तो आप तुरंत धारा ४८२ दंड प्रक्रिया संहिता के तहत उच्च न्यायालय में एक याचिका दाखिल करें और प्रथम सूचना रिपोर्ट को समाप्त करने का प्रार्थना करे क्योकि उक्त अपराध करित करने का प्रथम दृष्टया साक्ष्या सूचना रिपोर्ट पर उपलब्ध नही है।

Land reacquired under land acquisition act

Our land was acquired by the government in the year 2000 and compensation was also paid. But after 4 years we regained our land by the order of the court, acquired lands were not utilised by the government for the purpose they were acquired. Now the government again published notification for land acquisition in the year 2014 and acquired our land.

We got permission from the government towards the use of land. We are cultivating our lands. Can the government again acquire our land which was released in our favour? some parts of the land are taken separately for buildings and accommodation for companies. It is purely private use instead of public use. Our case had dismissed in a lower court against this acquisition. Can we get relief from the high court?

Land acquisition is an executive act and it is performed by the government. According to the land acquisition act, the land shall be acquired for the larger public interest only. What is the larger public interest shall be decided by the government? This is the subject of judicial review. The court is empowered to judge the purpose of the land acquisition in the larger public interest. This is called judicial review.

In-State of Haryana vs Vinod Oil and General Mills (2014) 15 SCC, it is held by the Supreme court that the permission of change of land use has no relevance while considering the validity of acquisition. There is no bar to the subsequent acquisition of land after the land was released from earlier acquisition.

In Monnet Ispat and Energy Ltd. vs Union of India (2012) 11 SCC, it is held by the Supreme court that doctrine of promissory estoppel does not apply on the legitimate acquisition of land for the larger public interest. Means court cannot stop re-acquisition of land on the doctrine of promissory estoppel.

Thus it is clear from the above discussion that the government can reacquire your land which was once released in your favour. If the government has a valid purpose behind the land acquisition then it can reacquire that land nevertheless that use of land is changed.

In Sooraram Pratap Reddy vs District Collector Ranga Reddy District (2008) 9 SCC, it is held by the Supreme court that the project for which land is acquired should be taken as whole and mist be judged whether it is in the larger public interest. It cannot be split into different components and to consider whether every component will serve the public good. A holistic approach has to be adopted in such matter.

So it does not matter that some parts of the land have taken separately for the accommodation of works of the companies. It is part and parcel of the public interest that living standard of the workmen must be maintained and basic amenities must be provided by the government.

Your case is dismissed by the district court so you can file an appeal before the High Court. But in the present scenario, your case is weak and no probability to get appropriate relief from appellate authority.

Disclosure of information under RTI

Can information under RTI ACT be taken regarding the degrees, name of the university where one had been reading? Roll no of the university, photocopies of the Degrees, photocopies of Service Book & ACRs of Government employees, through their public information officers.

Can the authority higher than the PIO of a concerned Government employee ask for the above-said information of the Government employee under RTI act or direct the PIO to supply directly the information to the RTI Activist. Are these things be named as personal information and is there any exemption Under RTI Act or Not.P lease explain in detail and Lucid/simple way.

The Right to Information Act (RTI) was enacted to promote transparency and accountability in government and its institutions, and to prevent corruption. Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution provides freedom of speech and expression, which forms the basis for the RTI Act. The Act only allows access to information that is of public importance, and personal information is protected under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

Private information cannot be accessed unless its disclosure is necessary for the public interest. For Section 8(1)(j) to apply, the personal information requested must not relate to any public activity or public interest, and its disclosure must not cause an unwarranted invasion of privacy. Educational records, such as roll numbers, mark sheets, degree certificates, and photocopies, are exempt from disclosure under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act and must be kept private by universities to maintain their fiduciary relationship with students.

In Mr. Neeraj Kumar vs. JNU (Appeal No. CIC/SG/A/2008/00248/), the Chief Information Commissioner held that educational records, degrees, and caste certificates should not be disclosed under RTI unless the person holds a public office, receives a salary from public funds, and performs public functions. In such cases, all documents submitted in connection with the public appointment must be disclosed, and the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) will not apply.

Similarly, in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central Information Commissioner and others (2013) 1 SCC 212, the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the CIC to deny information about the service career, ACR, promotion criteria, and properties of government employees, as such information qualifies as personal information under Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act.

The court affirmed this decision in R.K. Jain vs. Union Of India & Anr AIR 2013, stating that details such as memos, ACRs, show-cause notices, orders of censure/punishment, movable and immovable properties, and investments or borrowing cannot be disclosed under the RTI Act.

In conclusion, service books, ACRs, and personal information cannot be disclosed under the RTI Act, and any information protected under Section 8 is exempt from disclosure by the PIO or any other superior officer.

Question: Can a person seek information about the marksheet of an employee under the RTI? A third party is seeking photo copies of qualification certificates and marksheets of a senior employee without invoking any larger public interest under RTI Act. Is the information exempted under Section 8. What are different judicial precedents in this connection?

Asked from: Jammu & Kashmir

Marksheets of an employee constitute private information and can only be disclosed under the Right to Information (RTI) Act if the requester can demonstrate a larger public interest. However, if the employee has been appointed to their position in accordance with the selection rules, there is no public interest in the disclosure of their marksheets.

Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act specifically prohibits the disclosure of personal information, and the disclosure of marksheets in the absence of public interest would constitute an invasion of privacy.

loss of sale deed

I have purchased one flat in the year 2011. While purchasing flat the owner told me that he lost builder documents (Sales deed with the builder). He is the first owner. After that, I asked the seller to give me the police complaint copy(FIR). He provided the police complaint copy which is done by her husband in their local police station. and also I did indemnity bond with the seller. And He provided me Attested copy of sales deed provided by sub-registrar.

Bank also did the search report and approve the loan. Even Society also transferred me the flat (Share Certificate, NOC copy) etc. I just like to know whether any problem will arise in the future. AND what additional precaution to be taken.

You should get a certified copy of sale deed from the office of the Sub Registrar. A Registered document like Deed of sale is not a public document. It is a private document. Book 1 kept in the Registration Offices under the Registration Act, where the Registered documents (private documents) are copied, entered or filed, is a public document.

A certified copy of a registered document, copied from Book 1 and issued by the Registering Officer, is neither a pubic document, nor a certified copy of a private document, but is a certified copy of a public document.

According to section 17 of the Registration Act sale of immovable property valued more than 100 rupees must be registered. That registration is a notice that property is conveyed from one person to another. According to Section 51 of Registration Act, all deeds relating to immovable property of which registration is compulsory under Section 17 are entered or filed in Book 1 kept by the Registering Officers. 

Section 62 of the Registration Act provides that Registrar shall, on receiving requisite fee, provide a certified copy of the entries made in book 1. Such certificate (certified copy) shall be signed, sealed and dated by the registering officer, and shall then be admissible for the purpose of proving that the document has been duly registered in the manner provided by this Act.

Thus nature and evidentiary value of the document remains the same whether it is a registered deed or certified copy of that deed. Section 77 of the Evidence Act provides that the Court shall presume to be genuine every document purporting to be a certificate, certified copy or another document, which is by law declared to be admissible as evidence of any particular fact and which purports to be duly certified by any officer of the Central Government or of a State Government.

Above mentioned that a certified copy of a registered sale deed issued by the Registering Officer, by copying from Book 1, is a certified copy of a public document.

A certified copy obtained from a Registrar’s office shall be admissible for the purpose of proving the contents of the original document. That means that the mere production of a certified copy without any further oral evidence to support it would be enough to show what the original document obtained.

A certified copy is called secondary evidence of the original. Section 65 & 66 of the evidence act provides that if the original document is lost, a duly certified copy of the original shall be produced and it is admissible in evidence.

No problem will arise in future that the original sale deed has lost and the owner possesses only certified copy. FIR is not a substantive piece of evidence to prove that original sale deed has lost, it is a conduct of the informant that a relevant point of time he admitted that original sale deed has lost.

You can file a declaratory suit under section 34 of the Specific Relief Act and get a declaration from the court that the original sale deed has lost and you are the absolute owner of the property. This suit shall be filed by you against the previous owner (seller) of the property. He will accept in the court that the original sale deed has lost, he sold this property on lawful consideration and transferred absolute right to the purchaser (you).

That declaration decree shall be conclusive proof of the facts declared by the court. However, it is not necessary to file declaratory suit but you can file it for the better security of your title.

Property Tax

I am a Senior citizen aged 73 years Ex-serviceman was in active service during all the three wars. Suffering from high blood pressure. I purchased House flat No.6-3-790/3/1 and registered on my name on 5.12.2003 from xxx and let out for residential use. The person lived with family children and running kitchen. His wife used the sewing machine and embroidery.

They maintained that they were using the flat for residential. I have paid property tax up to 2015 but received several notices from GHMC. I have given several representations to the concerned authority but nothing has been done till date. Please advice what action should I take.

Have a look at how the property tax is assessed by the Commissioner of the GHMC. According to the A.P. Municipalities Act, 1965 (APM Act), where the Council by resolution determines that a property tax shall be levied, such tax shall be levied on all buildings and lands within Municipal limits at a percentage of their Annual Rental Value (ARV) or capital value of the land.

Section 85 of APM Act, 1965 prescribed that property tax shall be levied at such percentages of the capital value of lands or buildings on such graded basis, as may be fixed by the Council in respect of buildings or lands used or occupied by the owner. Secondly, property tax shall be levied at such percentages of the Annual Rental Value of such buildings or lands let out on rent. Tax levied for the residential building, within the municipal area, @ 25 per cent of Annual Rental Value.

The Annual Rental Value (ARV) of lands and buildings shall be deemed to be the gross annual rent at which they may reasonably be expected to let from month-to-month or year-to-year with reference to the following factors:

  • Location of the building
  • Type of construction
  • Plinth area
  • Age of the building
  • Nature of usage to which it is put

According to your question, all the notices of the GHMC are issued on an arbitrary basis and no reasoned decision based upon reasoning have been given ever. According to the Hyderabad Municipal Corporations Act, 1955 property tax cannot be fixed on the basis of a photograph of the property. In each case on spot physical verification is necessary. Whenever a notice has been given to the assessee it must be reasoned and prepared in the format prescribed in Assessment of Property Tax Rules, 1990.

The Commissioner is bound by the AMP Act to duly fix the monthly rental value and records reasons for increase/decrease of Property Tax for each assessment. As soon as the assessment is fixed by the Commissioner in the Assessment list, a special notice of property tax for assessment of property tax or amendment where there is an enhancement in the tax shall be prepared in the format prescribed in Assessment of Property Tax Rules, 1990. Where there is the enhancement of the tax, the owners of properties are entitled to file revision petitions within 30 days from the date of service of special notice.

As soon as a revision petition is received in municipal office from a taxpayer against the property tax assessment fixed by the Commissioner, the revision petition shall be entered in a Register of Revision Petitions in Form E appended to Andhra Pradesh Municipalities (Assessment of Taxes) Rules, 1990.

The Commissioner shall give an opportunity to the petitioner to appear either in person or by an authorized agent. At the time of the hearing, the Commissioner shall record the statement of the petitioner regarding the submissions made by him for reduction of property tax. After recording the statement of the petitioner by the Commissioner, the signature of the petitioner shall be obtained on the statement.

After completing the hearing of the revision petition, the Commissioner shall pass a speaking order. In simple terms, a speaking order is an order that speaks for itself. The order should contain all the details of the case, pleadings of the petitioner, clear findings of the competent authority on the case and should appear as a reasoned order.

The above-mentioned procedure for assessment of property tax has not been followed by the concerned authority in your case. The concerned authority has passed all the orders arbitrarily without giving reasons about the enhancement of tax and penalty thereupon. This act of authority constitutes the cause of action to initiate legal recourse against those orders.

According to para 16 of your question, a Tax Inspector was visited your house and conducted physical verification. In order to that verification, a revised bill was sent to you. If you find this revised bill of tax Rs, 29698/ annum is legally assessed thus you can file a suit.

You should file a civil suit before the City Small causes Court, Hyderabad for fixing of property tax as per the law framed by the GHMC and compensation for mental agony, cost incurred in the litigation and rebate from late payment of tax.

In M/S. Big Apple Manufacturing Co. vs GHMC [State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission 2012] Held by the State Forum that:-

“The purpose of the tax is to raise funds for the support of the Government or for a public purpose. The tax levied for the general purpose of the state provides various forms of facilities to citizens cannot be said to be a consideration for any specific facility, benefit, or service provided by the state. There can be no nexus between the tax and service rendered by the municipality and on this ground assesses does not become a consumer. Thus matter has to be decided by the City Small causes Court and not by Consumer Forum.