9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (10) TMI 375X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riefly, "the Act") for a period of three years with effect from March 20, 1990, that is, the date of first sale. The eligibility certificate was granted by the respondent with effect from July 20, 1992 instead under the provisions of the Act saying that the petitioner failed to fulfil all the conditions on the date of first sale, inasmuch as there was no registered lease deed on March 20, 1990. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el Committee (for short, "the Committee") rejected the contention of the petitioner saying that if there were any lease deed of January 1, 1990, then that would have been referred to in the registered lease deed of March 23, 1990. The case of the petitioner is that the lease deed of January 1, 1990 was produced before the notary and that was duly notarised on the same day and thereafter the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner raised the contention that the deed dated January 1, 1990 was duly notarised by the notary and the rent was remitted by a crossed cheque, the Committee ought to have considered the same to come to the conclusion whether the deed dated January 1, 1990 existed. 4.. Another contention of the petitioner is that though the date of commencement of the lease was not mentioned in the registered le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he petitioner. As the Committee failed to consider the vital questions, we have no option but to remit the case back to the Committee for reconsideration. 6.. On these facts, the petition succeeds and is allowed; the impugned order dated October 21, 1993, annexure 16 to the writ petition is quashed. The case is sent back to the Divisional Level Committee-respondent No. 2, who will decide the rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
