LexTATA MOTORS LTD. versus TALATHI OF VILLAGE CHIKHALI AND ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2011] 7 S.C.R. 863 TATA MOTORS LTD. v. TALATHI OF VILLAGE CHIKHALI AND ORS. (Civil Appeal No. 10187 of 2010) JULY 4, 2010 [R.V. RAVEENDRAN, P. SATHASIVAM AND A.K. PATNAIK, JJ.] . A B Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966: ss.39, 168 - Non-agricultural cess - Liability to pay - Lease of land granted c to the appellant by the Pimpri-Chinchwad New Development Authority - Demand on the appellant for payment of non- agricultural cess - Challenged by appellant on the ground that it was a government lessee and, therefore not liable to pay the amount demanded and in the alternate, appellant D took plea that it was tenant of the Development Authority and demand for non-agricultural assessment could be made only on the Development Authority and not against the. tenant - Held: s~2(11) rlw s.38 defines a 'government lessee' as a lessee under a lease granted by a Collector in regard to E unalienated unoccupied land belonging to the government - In the instant case, the land was not leased by the Collector to the appellant - The lease deed stated that the lands leased were held by the Development Authority - There was also nothing to show that the lands belonged to government and that the Development Authority granted the lease in favour F of appellant, acting as an agent of the state government - Therefore, the leased lands were not government lands and the lessor was not the government - Therefore, the contention that the appellant was a 'government lessee' and, therefore, . not liable to pay the non-agricultural assessment is rejected G - However, by virtue of Pimpri-Chanchwad New Town Development authority (Disposal of Land) Regulations, 1973 rlw the lease deed statutory liability was imposed on the appellant-lessee to pay the non-agricultural assessment to the 863 H 864 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2011] 7 S.C.R. A state government - Having regard to the statutory liability created under the 1973 Regulations, the position of the lessee would be similar to a tenant referred to in sub-section 1 (c) of s. 168 which provides that in case of land in possession of a tenant, such tenant if he is liable to pay land revenue 8 therefor under the relevant tenancy laws, shall be primarily liable to the state government for the payment of land revenue, including all arrears - The liability of the appellant as tenant, to pay the land revenue, though not under a 'tenancy ·law' in its strict sense, but is nevertheless under a statutory regulation c governing the tenancy and, therefore, the demand by the state government directly against the appellant, can be justified by the principle underlying s.168(1)(c) - Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act - ss.113, 114 and 118 - Pimpri- Chanchwad New Town Development authority (Disposal of 0 Land) Regulations, 1973 - Regulations 10(iv), (v) - Land laws and agricultural tenancy. Words and phrases: Word 'occupant' - Meaning of, in the context of Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. E The appellant was granted a lease of land under leas~ deed dated 3.1.1995 by Pimpri-Chinchwad New Development Authority for a term of 99 years commencing from 21.11.1994. The appellant utilised the said plot and the adjoining plot obtained on lease from F Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC) for construction of factory. The appellant commenced construction of its plant and on completion commenced actual use for industrial purpose in 1999. The competent authority served demand notices on the appellant for G payment of non-agricultural cess and additional non- agricultural cess for the period 1995-96 to 2001-02. The appellant filed writ petition before the High Court challenging the demand notices on the ground that it being a "government lessee" was not liable to pay the H demand amount. The appellant also took an alternate plea TATA MOTORS LTD. v. TALATHI OF VILLAGE 865 CHIKHALI AND ORS. that it was a tenant of the Development Authority and A was, therefore, not liable to pay the non-agricultural cess assessment under the provisions of the Maharashtra Land Revenue Code, 1966. The High Court rejected the contention of the B appellant that it was government lessee. It held that as a lessee under the Development Authority, the appellant was liable to pay the non-agricultural assessment. The High Court, however, held that having regard to section 115 of the Code, non-agricultural assessment could be C levied only with effe
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.