|
Online edition of India's National Newspaper Thursday, October 18, 2001 |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home |
|
Southern States
| Previous
| Next
TANSI case: guideline value takes centrestage
By A. Subramani
CHENNAI, OCT. 17. Faced with a barrage of must-answer queries
from Mr. Justice N. Dinakar in the `TANSI land deals appeals
case', the specially appointed prosecutor, Mr. K. V.
Venkatapathi, said Rs. 3 lakhs per ground price was applicable to
the TANSI-Tamil Nadu Cooperative Sugar Federation deal alone.
Mr. Venkatapathi contended that the Federation being a statutory
body and a `Government concern', the land was transferred to it
without any tender, that too for a low price of Rs. 3 lakhs.
Moreover, it was a conditional offer which necessitated the
Federation to construct 15,000 square feet of super-structure and
hand it over to the TANSI. This offer should not be used to
justify the TANSI-Jaya Publications and TANSI-Sasi Enterprises
deals, he added.
But, Mr. Justice Dinakar, contesting the claim that the
Federation was a `Government concern', asked the prosecutor to
let him know about the legal status of the Federation. To this,
the prosecutor replied that the land transfer deed was executed
in favour of the Sugar Commissioner, who is an IAS officer,
making it clear that the Federation was under the control of the
State Government.
The judge also expressed his disagreement when Mr. Venkatapathi
said the guideline value of a land transaction would be
applicable to all prospective deals in the same registry limits.
``If so, what would be the guideline value of Survey Number 105
which falls partly in Chennai city limits and partly in
Kancheepuram registration district?'', he asked.
The guideline value factor again took centrestage when the judge
remarked that the special judge had ``misdirected himself too
much by oscillating between the guideline value and market
value''.
Mr. Justice Dinakar also asked the prosecution as to how the
figure of Rs. 7.32 lakhs per ground was arrived at, to calculate
the ultimate loss to exchequer. ``What guided the sub- registrar
to come to a conclusion that the property was worth Rs. 7.32
lakhs per ground. There must be some basis for the figure''.
Mr. Venkatapathi said in 1990 the Jaya Publications bought a
piece of land from the Idhayam Publications at Rs. 6 lakhs per
ground. The rate was arrived at after the sub-registrar referred
the matter to the Inspector-General of Registration, whose letter
to his deputy in this regard was marked as a prosecution
document.
Mr. Venkatapathi said that Rs. 7.32 lakhs was reached after the
parties in the Idhayam Publications-Jaya Publications land
transaction were asked to pay stamp duty for that amount. ``They
did not contest the Registration Department's notice'', he added.
Noting that just because the parties did not contest the claim
the department should not fix it as a permanent guideline value
for future transactions, the judge wondered, ``ultimately it is
the decision of one man, on the basis of which you will tell
parties that they have to pay more''.
Mr. Venkatapathi had a tough time when the judge raised doubts
over the admissibility of the letter itself. Mr. Justice Dinakar
rapped the prosecution in the trial court for having failed to
examine both the author and the addressee of the letter, which
was a vital document, according to the judge.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
|
|
Section : Southern States Previous : AIADMK plans 'bogus voting' Next : Results on Oct. 22 | |
|
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Science & Tech |
Entertainment |
Miscellaneous |
Features |
Classifieds |
Employment |
Index |
Home | |
|
Copyright © 2001 The Hindu Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu |
|