9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1036X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o have not been impleaded by the petitioner in the present petition, had already entered into an agreement to sell the same plot to the petitioner/accused No. 7 on April 3, 1996 for a sum of Rs. 80 lakhs. It is the case of the respondent that section 269UC of the Act mandates that no transfer exceeding the prescribed limit, in relation to any immovable property, can be made by way of a sale or exchange or lease for a term of not less than 12 years and no possession of such a property can be allowed to be taken or retained in part performance of the contract covered under section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, unless an agreement for transfer is entered into amongst the parties at least four months before the intended date of transfer, reduced into writing in the form of statement, as laid down in Form No. 37-I of the Act, by each or either of the parties to such a transfer on behalf of the other, and furnished in duplicate to the Appropriate Authority. As per the respondent, the aforesaid prescribed procedure was not followed by accused Nos. 3 to 6 or by the petitioner/accused No. 7, in respect of the agreement to sell entered into by them on April 3, 1996. As a result, the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eceive notice to show cause because in the absence of a notice and a reply filed thereto, the complaint could not be filed by the respondent. It is secondly urged that the Delhi court do not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain the complaint as the plot in question is situated at Faridabad and further, there was no adjudication qua the petitioner in Delhi. It is also urged by the counsel for the petitioner that though notice of the aforesaid argument of lack of territorial jurisdiction of the courts at Delhi was taken before the court below, a specific finding was not returned in the impugned order. 6. Per contra, counsel for the respondent submits that it is a case of pre-emptive purchase of land. He refers to the provisions of section 269UC to urge that it is a substantive law and deals with restrictions placed on transfer of immovable property. He submits that the law mandates that Form 37-I must be furnished by a party to a sale transaction in the manner as provided for in the said section, failing which no transfer of any immovable property shall be effected. He also seeks to advert to section 269UL of the Act, which deals with restrictions on registration, e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere is substance in the submission of the counsel for the respondent that the law does not mandate any notice to show cause in a case of the present nature and that once a complaint is filed and prosecution proceedings are initiated for violation of the provisions of section 269UC of the Act, the petitioner would have an opportunity to take all the defences that may be available to him in law while contesting the complaint. In the case of General Sales P. Ltd. [1987] 166 ITR 77 (Delhi), a single judge of this court had turned down a similar plea raised by the accused therein and held that the question of whether the accused was entitled to an opportunity to show cause, prior to the launching of prosecution against him can be taken up as a preliminary objection before the trial magistrate. 9. In the case of Asst. Commissioner (Assessment) v. Velliappa Textiles Ltd. reported in [2003] 263 ITR 550 (SC) ; [2003] 11 SCC 405, where the question before the Supreme Court was whether an opportunity to be heard should have been granted to the accused before granting sanction for prosecution of certain offences under the Income-tax Act, it was held as under (page 567) : "The a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... took place in Delhi, to vest territorial jurisdiction in Delhi courts. 12. Further, the provisions of sections 177 and 178 as set out in Chapter XIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure are clear. Section 177 stipulates that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction it was committed. Section 178 has further widened the scope by stating that when it is uncertain in which of several local areas an offence is committed, or where an offence is committed partly in one local area and partly in another, or where the offence is continuing one, and continues to be committed in more local areas than one, or where it consists of several acts done in different local areas, it may be inquired into or tried by a court having jurisdiction over any of such local areas. In the case of Satvinder Kaur v. State reported in [1999] 8 SCC 728, the Supreme Court held as under (page 736) : "14. Further, the legal position is well settled that if an offence is disclosed the court will not normally interfere with an investigation into the case and will permit investigation into the offence alleged to be completed. If the FIR, prima faci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly thereto filed by the respondent/Department. Merely because the said plea was not rejected in so many words in the operative para of the order dated December 7, 2002 cannot be a ground to entertain the present petition. 15. Even otherwise, there is no illegality, infirmity or arbitrariness in the impugned order dated May 22, 2004, which would result in a serious miscarriage of justice, for this court to exercise its extraordinary powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed. 16. It is, however, clarified that the petitioner shall be entitled to take all the pleas that may be available to him in law before the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, including the plea of lack of territorial jurisdiction as well as that of absence of show-cause notice before launch of prosecution along with other preliminary objections, if any, and the same shall be considered and disposed of in accordance with law. 17. At this stage, counsel for the petitioner states that taking into consideration the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen, aged 78 years and is suffering from various age ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
