before lahore development authority commission , …. no.81.pdf · muhammad saeed sio ch. ali...

BEFORE LAHORE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY COMMISSION ,LAHORE

PRESENT:

Mr. Javaid Akhtar, Chairman

Mr. Muhammad Yousaf, Member

Reference No. 81/2018

Sheikh Azhar Waheed Slo Sheikh Abdul Waheed RIo House No.365, Block A-II, MA Johar Town Lahore.

Applicant

Vs.

1. Lahore Development Authority through Director General, 467/0-11,Main Boulevard, M.A. Johar Town, Lahore.

2. Director, Land Development-I, 467/D-li, Main Boulevard, M.A.Johar Town, Lahore.

RespondentsOrder

Sheikh Azhar Waheed slo Sheikh Abdul Waheed through his AttorneyAteeq-ur-Rehman submitted an application at One Window on 22.04.2015vide receipt No. 2138235 for filing reference to the LOA Commission. TheAuthorized Officer under sub-section (4) of section 32 of LOA (Amendment)Act, 2013 read with sub-rule (1) of the Rule 7 of the Lahore DevelopmentAuthority Commission Rules, 2014, referred the case to the Commissionwhich was received on 09.01.2018. It was entered in the Institution Registerat Serial No. 81 of 2018.

Notices were issued to the Applicant, the Director General LOA and DirectorLand Development-I, Land Acquisition Collector, LOA and Patwari HalqaAjhodia Pur and other witnesses. The statements of the Mr. Attique-urRehman GPA of the Applicant, Dr. Muhammad Saeed slo Ali MuhammadNawabzada Saadat Ali Khan and Nawabzada Wajahat Ali Khan witnesseswere recorded on oath and record of Patwari Halqa Ajhodia pur and LACoffice of LOA was consulted. The documents produced by the Applicant,Patwari Halqa and LAC were examined and photo copies thereof placed onthe reference file. File of the plot No.JT-AP-2872 attached with the reference by the Directorate LandDevelopment-I hereafter referred to as (plot file) was examined.

2. According to the reference filed by the LOA;

of 14

"One Mst. Tanveer Bano W/o Nawabzada Saadat Ali Khanclaimed the ownership of land measuring 01-Kanal and 14-marlafalling in Khasra No. 689, 687, 646/1, 649/1, 647, 1289/684 and1278/645 Mouza Ajodhiapur, Lahore and requested for grant ofexemption in shape of developed plots in lieu of her land acquired bythe Lahore Development Authority for its scheme namely M.A. JoharTown. She was granted exemption in shape of plot No. 461 and 462Block-N1 of M.A. Johar Town, Lahore each measuring 05 marlaagainst her claimed ownership by the then OLDon 31-08-1989 at para18/N.

Allocation letter of plot No. 461 Block-N1 was issued infavour of Mst. Tanveer Banoo W/o Nawabzada Saadat Ali Khan videletter No. JT-AP-2872/6872 dated 24.11.1989 (3/C). Exemptionletter was issued vide letter No. JT/AP/2872/8730 dated 13.12.1989(Page 39/C). The allocation and exemption letter were issued undercertain terms and condition. Clause-07 of allocation letter and clause17 of exemption letter are reproduced as under:-

"7). That, if at any stage, your title is proved to bedefective or is discovered that the exemptionhas been procured fraudulently the allocationof theplot shall stand automatically with-drawn.

17). That if at any stage, your title is proved to bedefective, the exemption of the plot shall standautomatically withdrawn and LOA will beentitled to take over the land alongwithstructure standing thereon without payment ofany damage or compensation. (E & 0 are to betaken up at any stage)."

A general power of attorney was executed by Mst. Tanveer Bano infavour of Nawabzada Saadat Ali Khan S/o Nawab Shaukat Ali Khanregarding plots No. 461 and 462 Block-NI of M.A. Johar Town, Lahoreregistered by Sub Registrar, Model Town, Lahore vide document No.7770, Book No. 04, Volume 264 dated 30.10.1989 (Page 51-57/C).Possession order of the plot No. 461 Block-N1 of M.A. Johar Town,was issued in favour of Mst. Tanveer Bano through GPA NawabzadaSaadat Ali Khan vide letter No. JT/AP-2872/132 dated 09.01.1990(Page 59/C). The said plot was transferred by Mst. Tanveer Banothrough GPA Nawabzada Saadat Ali Khan on the basis of registeredsale deed registered by Sub Registrar, Model Town, Lahore videdocument No. 285, Book No.1, Volume No. 1003 dated 09.10.1990(Page 63-69/C). Transfer letter was issued vide letter No. JT/AP-

~ PageZof14

~VOlt

2872/852 dated 08.02.1990 (Page 99/C). It is pointed out that said plotwas transferred on the same terms & conditions as it was held by theoriginal exemptee. As per letter available in file (Page No.1 03/C) dated09-01-91. Vide LAC No. 138 the ownership of Mst. Tanveer Bano hasbeen cancelled. Later on, dated 11-02-15 an application for BonafideCommission received from one Attique Ur Rehman Siddiqui Sio JaleelUr Rehman Siddiqui thereby claiming to be GPA of Dr. Sh. AzharWaheed Sio Sh. Abdul Waheed. He is also claiming that the Dr. Sh.Azhar Waheed Sio Abdul Waheed has purchased the plot from Dr.Muhammad Saeed Sio Ch. Ali Muhammad through sale deed VideDoc No. 285, Book No.1, Vol No. 1003 dated 09-01-90 and said Dr.Sh. Azhar Waheed also submitted the application for transfer in LOA.There was available neither such application for transfer in favour ofDr. Sh. Azhar Waheed Sio Sh. Abdul Waheed nor any transfer letterwas issued to him, but transfer fee submitted by Dr. Muhammad Saeeddated 24.01.1993 stands verified at para No. 62 at Sr. No.7."

3. In light of reports obtained from different quarters, LOA narratedfollowing facts regarding the instant case:

I. "The status of award and ownership of exemptee Mst. TanveerBano sought from Land Acquisition Collector, LOA. LandAcquisition Collector reported that ownership of Mst. TanveerBano has been cancelled.

II. Verification of dues was sought from Directorate of Revenuewhich is available at para 62-64/N. As per report, all duesincluding first & final demand notices for development charges,and transfer fee stands verified.

iii. The status of plot No. 461 Block-Al1 in possession register andat site was sought from Directorate of Estate Management-I,LOA. The Estate Branch has reported at para 68-69/N thatpossession of plot No. 461 Block-Al1 was handed over toexemptee through GPA Saadat Ali Khan and double storeyhouse is constructed at site.

iv. Report of Town Planning Wing is available at para 74/N whichshows that building file against plot No. 461 Block-Al1 does notexist in record.

v. Instant file is not included in the list of missing files which werepublished in 2009.

VI. Instant file is included in the inventory list created in year 2007-08.

VII. The scrutiny list was consulted and the instant file is notincluded in those files which are under scrutiny.

A14

~UI~

VIII. The appearance of GPA Attiique Ur Rehman Siddiqui SioJaleel Ur Rehman Siddiqui stands recorded at para No. 75N.

IX. Dr. Sh. Azhar Waheed Sio Sh. Abdul Waheed through GPAAttique Ur Rehman Siddiqui Sio Jaleel Ur Rehman Siddiqui isclaiming to be Bonafide purchaser of the plot No. 461 BlockAl1 of M.A. Johar Town, Lahore and submitted application videOWO No. 22102836 dated 11-02-2015."

4. Dr. Muhammad Saeed slo Ali Muhammad appeared before theCommission and stated on oath that in 1990 he was working as Capitan inthe Army Medical Corps in Saudia Arabia and in order to make someinvestment he purchased the Plot No. 461 Block A-I MA Johar Town throughhis father-in-law. He met a Property Dealer whose name he did notremember who informed about the availability of a plot. Although sale deedwas registered in his favour but he did not sign the document and instead hisfather-in-law Mr. Abdul Sattar slo Abdullah signed the sale deed. Herecognized the signature of his farner-in-law who has passed away. Howeverat the time of transfer of the plot Dr. Saeed went to the LOA office with theProperty dealer. He stated that he later on sold the Plot to Dr. Sheikh AzharWaheed vide Registered Sale Deed No. 11558 dated 29.12.1998. Heverified his signature as letter on the Sale Deed Mark-II.

Mr. Wajahat Ali Khan in his state.ncnt on o=th recognized the signature ofhis brother Nawabzada Saadat A!i Khan on the sale deed Mark-I. Heconfirmed that he signed the Sa.e deed and the transfer application as awitness. He also recognized the signature of his brother on the statement atpage of plot file in which he had admitted the receipt the amount. He alsoclaimed that they checked the plct file in LOA. He admitted that, in fact, theplot was purchased by his brother Saadat Ali Khan in the name of his wife(Ms.Tanvir Bano).

5. Nawabzada Saadat Ali K;;an slo Shaukat Ali Khan in his statementon oath through video link stated inat the plot was exempted to his wife. Hehad power of Attorney on her benalf. This plot was sold to Dr. MuhammadSaeed against an amount of Rs. 60,000/- as mentioned in the RegisteredSale deed. He expressed his inal.itity to confirm whether actual amount wasreceived more or less than the mentioned in the registered sale deed.However he admitted that he hac received total sale amount and nothingwas outstanding against Dr. Saeec purchaser of Exemption rights of the plot.He further stated that he purchased the land from Abdul Bari to whom theplot was exempted. Attique-ur-Renrnan slo Jalil Ahmad Siddique Rio HouseNo. 461 Block A-I MA Johar TONn in his statement claimed that he wasassociated with his brother-in-law ur. Azhar Waheed when he purchased theplot. After information received from a Property dealer about availability of

~ci2--\¥'

plot, they went to LOA office and Record Keeper Iqbal confirmed that plot filewas Ok. Since at that time before the transfer of plot submission ofRegistered Sale Deed was necessary, they got executed a Sale Deed infavour of Dr. Waheed. They initially paid a token price of Rs. 50001- to Dr.Saeed and then got registered a sale deed. For the purpose of transfer infavour of Dr. Azhar Waheed, the seller Dr. Saeed and he himself appearedbefore the transfer officer. The Challan form for transfer fee was issued andthey deposited the transfer fee in the Bank. After few days when he went toLOA office the concerned clerk did not give him the transfer letter. Later on,they came to know that our transfer letter and transfer set had been removedfrom the file. Meanwhile he had also deposited Sui Gas charges. Hesubmitted a copy of order of Lahore High Court dated 23.05.1997 in whichthe Honourable Judge of the High Court Mr. Muhammad Islam Bhatti passedin Writ Petition No. 11720 of 1992 has declared the order dated 06.01.1991without lawful authority and of no legal effect. It is pertinent to mention thatLAC letter LAC No. 198 dated 09.01.1991 for cancellation of Award in thename of Mst. Tanvir Bano and others was issued as a consequence of theorder of OLD letter No. 06.01.1991 \Mark-III).

6. Mr. Abdul Sattar Patwari LAC office Mouza Ajhodia Pur produced therecord of Award Part B. According to record and his statement, Mst. TanvirBano was entered as Awardee for land measuring 01K-14M at the time ofannouncement of Award on 09.1o.~1982.Since there were many entries onthe page of Award, the Patwari LAC got report from Revenue Patwari whoreported on 09.05.2016 that Mutation No. 7414 was cancelled on15.02.2008. LAC Patwari admitted that in the Award Mst. Tanvir Bano is stillentered as Awardee, however while submitting report on the application forReference, LAC office has relied on the report of Revenue Patwari.

7. The Mutation No. 7414 \i'\l3S entered in pursuance of a RegisteredSale Deed No. 26721 dated 22.12. ~[980transferring 43/246 share of land inKhasra No. 646/1 and Khasra No. 1275/245 measuring 01K-14M in favourof Mst. Tanvir Bano wlo Saadat Ali Khan (Mark-IV). Initially in the mutationname of transferor was recorded 8S Abdul Bari Khan but after cutting theentries, the name of Sharnirn Ahmad etc sons and daughters of Abdul BariKhan were recorded in the column of transferor. The mutation No. 7414 wasnot passed by the Revenue Officer on the verbal report of Patwari Halqa on2008. The sale deed 26721 through which land measuring 01K-14M wastransferred by Abdul Sari Khan to Mst. Tanvir Bano has neither beencancelled nor contested by any party as per available record. Therefore Mst.Tanvir Bano wlo Nawabazada Saadat Ali the original exemptee was stillowner of the land measuring 01K-14M in khasra No.646/1 and Khasra No.1278/245 of Mouza Ajhodia Pur on the basis of said sale deed. It has been

Pace 5 of 14

held by the Higher Courts that "when certain deeds are duly executed andduly registered the burden of proving that they are not real transactions lieson those who allege the same."PLD 1964 WP (Rev) 60. Since the mutationwas entered as a consequences of a sale deed, nobody has contested thesale deed and the Patwari has recorded that there was no stay, the Revenueofficer was bound to approve the mutation as per entries of the sale deed. Ifsome changes had taken place during the execution of Sale Deed and entryof Mutation, then new facts would have been recorded on the mutation orthrough a new mutation. It appears that Patwari or his supervisor deleted thename of Abdul Bari because after his death the inheritance mutation hadbeen sanctioned on 29.08.2003. Therefore the land which was transferredby Abdul Bari to Mst. Tanvir Bano needed to be excluded from the landtransferred to his heirs, because they were responsible to transfer the landto Mst. Tanivir Bano.

8. According to the Chhant prepared by Patwari Halqa (Mark-III) MouzaAjudhiapur, Mr. Abdul Bari Khan was owner of land 34-K 7M. The landmeasuring 14 Kanal 2-marla in the names of his legal heirs Shamim AhmedKhan etc. has been transferred. It is evident that although Mst. AniqaMushtaq, Faiqa Mushtaq Daughters of Mushtaq Ahmed, Mr. Masoor Ahmedand Iftikhar Ahmed sons of Nawabzada Nasrullah Khan purchased the landfrom Mr. Abdul Bari Khan through sale deeds registered in the year 1980.But their Mutation were sancrioned in the year 2015 and 2016. The awardsof these persons along with tne award in the name of Mst. Tanveer Banowere cancelled vide letter dated 09.01.1991. This letter of cancellation wasdeclared by the Lahore High Court without lawful Authority and of no legaleffect. Therefore, remaining 20-Kanal 05-Marlas land available was rightlytransferred in the name of Aniqa Mushtaq and others mutations have beensanctioned. Mst. Tanvir Bano could also claim share from this 20K-05M landon the basis of sale deed registered in her favour. However from the Chhantit has been observed that Abdul Bari Khan has already sold this land throughdifferent sale deeds and mutations of such sale have been effected in theRevenue Record. However, the land from the name of heirs of Abdul Barican be transferred to Mst. Tanveer Bano Wlo Saadat Ali Khan because shehas first right over the land transferred to his heirs on the basis of Sale DeedNo. 26721 dated 22.12.1980 through which land was transferred to her byMr. Abdul Bari during his life. But since the Mutation NO.7414 was cancelled,it can now be reviewed and approved after the order of a competent RevenueOfficer. As per existing entries in the Revenue record no land is available inthe name of original exemptee.

9. The Applicant Dr. Aznar VVaheed has stated in the Application forreference to Commission that he had submitted Transfer Set along with DR.

Saeed seller and transfer was approved but Transfer letter was not issued.He has requested to transfer the plot No. 461 Block A-I, MA Johar Town inhis name. LOA has admitted in the reference that Exemption of this plot wasissued in favour of Mst. Tanvir Bano wlo Nawabzada Saadat Ali Khan videletter No. JT/AP/2872/8730 dated 13.12.1989 and it was transferred infavour of Dr. Muhammad Saeed slo Ch. Ali Muhammad vide JT/AP-2872/852 dated 08.02.1990. Therefore Dr. Muhammad Saeed was a bonafide purchaser as per evidence recorded and record perused. LOA has neverheld an inquiry to determine whether transfer set was submitted and if it wasso who was responsible for misplacing the relevant papers. Since now it hasbeen claimed that the land .of the original exemptee has been cancelled, inorder to resolve the dispute, the present transferee Dr. MuhammadSaeedshall deposit the amount (price of the plot of land) to get the proprtieryright of the plot and then transfer the plot to the Applicant.

10. LOA has alleged that the ownership of the original Exemptee hasbeen reduced and the original exemptee is no more awardee of landmeasuring 01K-14M. But it has neither challenged the exemption orderdated 13.12.1998 nor the transfer letter dated 08.02.1990 in favour of Dr.Muhammad Saeed. The record and evidence shows that Dr. Saeed presenttransferee purchased the plot after checking the file from LOA office. At thetime of transfer there was nothing in the file which could indicate about anydispute over ownership of the land. Therefore, the Commission despite thealleged reduction in land ownership of the original Exemptee, in view of SubSection (4) of Section 32 of tne LOA (Amendments) Act, 2013 read with Subsection (5) of Section 32 of the Act (ibid) has to consider the presentreference to resolve the dispute. The above mentioned provisions of the Actare reproduced below:

"(4) The Authority or-any officer so authorized by the Authority, on itsown motion or on the application of any person, may refer any matterto the Commission for consideration, resolution and decision if a primafacie case is made out."

"(5) The Commission shall consider and make appropriaterecommendations on matters pertaining to;

(a) bona fide purchase for value owing to irregular orfraudulent transaction in respect of property, the extent oflegality or illegality of the transaction, apportionment ofresponsibility in irregular or fraudulent transaction andtranslation of this responsibility into monetary terms andrecommendation of such conditions, fines, rate or fix price,

of 14

~.t,-ol,&

u

retrieval of property and demolition as deemed appropriateaccording to the nature of each case."

11. Exemption of the plot was transferred to the transferee Dr. Saeedby LOA on the same terms and condition on which it was held by theExemptee. Relevant portion of transfer letter No. JT/AP-2872/852 dated08.02.1990 is reproduced below:

"I am to inform you that the exemption of the plot cited above hasnow been transferred to your name on the terms and conditions itwas held by the original Exemptee."

The Transferee accepted the terms and conditions of the transfer. He himselfsigned the endorsement on the transfer application (page 0061 of plot fileNo. JT/AP-2872) which reads;

"I endorse the above application and if the property is transferred tome, I as successor in interest or (assignee) shall be subject to allthe conditions and terms contained in the Agreement/Exemptionletter between the transferor and the Lahore Department Authority."

12. At the time of transfer, the Transferee undertook to abide by the termsand conditions of the exemption of the said plot between the originalExemptee and LOA and to comply with all orders and directions andinstructions etc. in force or issued from time to time by the LOA. Therefore,whatever rights have come to vest in the Transferee, those did not constitutefull and absolute title in the plot. The Transferee was bound to fulfill theconditions laid down in the Exemption letter No. JT/AP-2872/8730 dated13.12.1989 issued to the original Exemptee. The Transferee, therefore, musthave been aware of the fact that his purchase was subject to the incident ofthose conditions which are contained in the Exemption Letter issued by theAuthority. The LOA had a right to cancel the allocation/exemption of plotunder clause 17 of the Exemption Letter No. JT/AP-2872/8730 dated13.12.1989 which reads;

"That if at any stage your title is proved to be defective, theexemption of the plot shall stand automatically withdrawn and LOAwill be entitled to take over the land along with structure standingthereon without payment of any damages or compensation. (E & 0are to be taken up at any stage.)"

13. Although the exemption was transferred by LOA i.e. the real ownerof the plot, yet the fact remains that the transfer was made conditionally andthe Transferee accepted those conditions without any objection. Every

of 14

purchaser of exemption rights is supposed to have knowledge that thetransaction of purchase is subject to those conditions which are contained inthe agreement for exemption or in the exemption letter. At this stage thecontention of the Transferee that he was not aware of the terms andconditions cannot be accepted. This being so, the Vendee despite beinginnocent buyer cannot raise the plea of protection on the principle of section41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 which relates to the transfer ofproperty by an ostensible owner. In the present case it was a conditional saleand the Transferee is bound to fulfill the conditions accepted by him at thetime of transfer of exemption in his favour. Moreover, Transferee's rightsbeing vendee of exemption rights cannot exceed the rights vested in thevendor who was not full owner of the plot and did not have proprietary rightsof the plot. Therefore, for acquiring proprietary rights the Transferee issubject to the conditions of the sale as per terms and conditions ofexemption.

14. Land for M.A. Johar Town Scheme was acquired on the basis ofexemption which means that 30% of the land of owners was exempted fromcompulsory acquisition and they, on certain specific terms and conditions,were allocated developed plots equal to their right of exemption i.e. 30% oftheir total holding acquired/surrendered. Title of the exempted plot is,however, transferred on fulfillment of the terms and conditions of exemption.Therefore, the Exemptee is not a full owner and exemption letter does notconstitute an absolute titie in the plot. The title of the plot remains vested inthe LOA till exchange deed is executed. The above mentioned plot wasexempted against the land of Khasra Nos. 647 etc. of Mauza Ajhodhia Pur,falling in M.A. Johar Town Scheme. The exemption rights were transferredsubject to the terms and conditions contained in the Exemption Letter andthe transferee was bound to transfer the land against which the exemptionwas granted, in favour of LOA by executing an exchange deed aftercompletion of building as per Clause 16 of the exemption letter JT/AP-2872/8730 dated 13.12.1989 which reads;

"That you shall be required to execute an Exchange Deed, after thecompletion of the building, in accordance with the sanctioned plan. Allexpenditures i.e. cost of stamps, Registration fee and other fees, taxesfor the execution of this deed shall be borne by you."

15. The defect in the ownership of the original Exemptee's land or pleaof fraud or irregularities committed by the LOA or the Revenue Departmentfunctionaries does not absolve the Transferee from abiding by the terms andconditions of the transfer of exemption accepted by him, even if the entiretransaction and proceedings before transfer of exemption are proved to befraudulent nor can he raise the plea of protection on the principle of section

Pace 9 of 14

41 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. In case he fulfills the terms andconditions accepted by him at the time of transfer of exemption, LOA shallbe bound to transfer to him the proprietary rights, notwithstanding the fraudor collusion committed by the LOA officers/officials to which the Transfereewas not a party. The original Exemptee paid the development charges whichas admitted by LOA have been duly verified. Dr. Muhammad Saeed, thetransferee, paid transfer fee but the price of the plot was not paid by him orhis predecessors to the LOA and instead the Transferee took upon himselfto transfer land to LOA by execution of an exchange deed. The vendor hasnot paid any price of the land of plot nor transferred land to the LOA,therefore, the price paid by the Transferee to the vendor does not includethe price of the land which was to be transferred to LOA in exchange of thesubject plot. Dr. Muhammad Saeed the Transferee is liable either to transferthe above mentioned land to the LOA or alternatively in order to resolve thedispute, to pay the price of the land of the plot for transfer of title of the plotin his favour.

16. In view of the position, as has been noticed by the Commission fromthe Revenue record, the Transferee in the presence of entries in Revenuerecord of Halqa Ajhodiha pur, cannot get transferred the required land to theLOA as per terms and conditions of the Allocation letter, therefore, he has toacquire proprietary rights on payment of the price of the plot (minusdevelopment charges already paid by original Exemptee). However if at alater stage the entries in the Jamabandi are amended through an order orappeal and the land is restored in the name of original Exemptee he canclaim the refund of amount. In case the plot had been in the name of theoriginal Exemptee who got it allocated allegedly on the basis of fraud andcollusion, the plot would have been certainly cancelled and she could havenot any right for its regularization. But when the plot was first transferred toDr. Muhammad Saeed, he would have been entitled to retain the plot underthese proceedings on establishinq that he was a bona fide purchaser. Theright of exemption i.e. to get the title of the plot by transferring ownership ofabove mentioned land, was conferred by the LOA when the LOA transferredexemption on receipt of transfer fee, therefore, price of the plot as on08.02.1990 as per DC's Valuation Table along with charges for delayedpayment, should be cnarged in order to resolve the dispute as envisaged insub section (4) of section 32 of the LOA (Amendments) Act, 2013 whichreads:

"(4) The Authority or any officer so authorized by the Authority, on itsown motion or on the application of any person, may refer any matterto the Commission for consideration, resolution and decision if a primafacie case is made out"

of 14

17. According to the DC's valuation table, the prevailing price in AjudhiaPur at the time of 1st transfer i.e. 08.02.1990 was Rs.16,571/- per Marla. Thusprice of 105.08 sq.m. plot comes to Rs.82,918/- The Transferee paid to the•LOA Rs.6475/- on 26-08-1989 and Rs.4996/- on 23-11-1989 as developmentcharges. Sui gas charges paid are not the part of the price of the plot andsimilarly the amounts paid subsequently for building period extensions or anyadditional amount recovered on account delayed payments cannot beconsidered part of the cost of the plot. However, the amount of Rs.11 ,371/paid as development charges can only be considered a part of the price ofthe plot. It was the responsibility of the Transferee as discussed above, toget transferred required land to the LOA and it is the Transferee who failedto abide by the terms and conditions of the exemption, therefore, he is liableto pay mark up at the rate of 17.5% per annum for delayed payment asspecified in clause 2 of the Allocation letter dated 24-11-1989 and clause 3of the Exemption letter dated 31-12-1989. On account of his failure to fulfillthe terms and conditions of exemption, he will have to pay to the LOA anamount of Rs.3,83,535/- as worked out below:-

-----. _,_"------ .--_---

Sr. No. De------- --

1) PriDisnesEx

2) De--

3) MaRs.19

1--------- 1-4) De

1------ 1-- -----

5) MaRs19

---_----

6) To~.- ..-----

7) CoCh-_ .. -

8) Adofexap

'--- ------

scription Amount (Rs.)----------------------_-- - ---- ------1---------ce of the 105.08 sq.rn plot as per 82,918/-trict Collector's Valuationarest to the date of Transfer ofemption i.e. 08-02-1990

---v. Charges paid on 26-08-1989 6,375/-----------------------------._.----- --------------1rk up on Dev Charges amounting to 507/-6,375/- for the period From 26-08-89 to 08-02-1990 (1st. Transfer)- --- ----- ------ ------------------j

v. Charges paid on 23-11-1989 4,996/-- ----------I------------i

rk up on Dev Charges amounting to 184/-.4,996/- for the period from 23-11-89 to 08-02-1990

-----------------------------1--------------1~:il Development charges with markup 12,062/-

----- ----1----------st of plot land (Total value - Dev. 70,856/arges paid)--- ---------------- --------------1--------d mark up for the period from the date 3,12,679/-

1st. transfer ofemption to the date of filing ofplication (22-04-2015)

____________________ _____J

of 14

,------,-- ----------------------_. __ .

9) Total cost of plot to be paid by the 3,83,535/-applicant to resolve to resolve thedispute

-----_-_. __ ..._--- ._------------'

In case of any patent error or omission apparent from the face of the record,is subsequently discovered in the above computation, the Commission mayrectify the same on an application by either party.

18. From the record and the evidence produced by the Applicant andthe transferee Dr. Muhammad Saeed it appears that:

I. The reduction in the land has occurred due to the ambiguity inthe Revenue Record. The original exemptee is the owner of theland on the basis of sale deed but the changes in ownership upto the extent of 01K-14M have not been incorporated.

II. The Applicant though is a bonafide purchaser of the exemptionrights from the Transferee but the Transfer order has not beenissued by LOA.

III. Both the Transferee and the Applicant purchased the plot in goodfaith after getting reasonable inquiry conducted from LOA.

IV. LOA did not comment on the claim of the Applicant that hesubmitted the transfer set but admitted that transfer fee was paid,but no inquiry was held to determine the true facts regarding hisclaim. He suffered agony for last twenty five years.

V. At the time of his purchase both by the Transferee and the by theApplicant, there was nothing on the record of LOA to indicate anysuspicious circumstance calling for inquiry regarding reduction ofland. The Mutation was entered but not approved in the year2008 whereas the Transferee and the Applicant both purchasedthe Plot in the year 1991 and 1993.

VI. The Transferee had paid full and fair price of the plot to theVendor for transfer of exemption rights and possession of theplot.

Therefore, Transferee Dr. Saeed is held to be a bona fide purchaser of therights of exemption granted by LOA to the original Exemptee.

19. In view of the above discussed facts, the record perused and theevidence examined, recommendations of the Commission are as below:-

of 14

I. Notwithstanding the fact that under clause 17 ibid, the LOA isauthorized to cancel exemption of plot No.461 , Block A-I, M.A.Johar Town, Lahore, it is recommended to resolve the disputethat on payment to the LOA by the Transferee an amount ofRs.03,31,472/- as worked out above as price of the land of theplot, in lieu of the above land which was to be surrendered toLOA, the Transferee will be allowed to retain the plot andproprietary right of the plot will be transferred in his favour or ofhis successor in interest as the case may be.

II. In case no appeal is filed by the Applicant or by the LOA againstthis order, LOA shall issue, within 30 days after the expiry of thetime prescribed for the appeal or from the date of the applicationmade by the Transferee, whichever is earlier, one or twoChallans at the option of the Transferee for the payment of theabove amount in lump sum or in two quarterly installments.

iii. Subsequent to the payment of the above determined amount bythe Transferee, the title of the Transferee or his successor ininterest at no stage, shall be called in question by LOA and thecases for sanction of the building plan, commercialization,issuance of NOC, further transfer etc. in respect of the above plotshall be processed by LOA as per relevant rules/policy in vogue.

iv. In case the Transferee fails to pay the above amount within sixmonths from the date of the issuance of the Challan(s), the LOAmay, retrieve the plot but not without compensation as envisagedin the clause 17 of the Exemption Letter read with the transferletter. On retrieval of the plot LOA will refund the developmentcharges received with markup @ 17.5% from the date of thepayment of development charges to the LOA up to the date ofthe LOA's cheque for the refund amount payable to theTransferee or the Applicant as the case may be. The amount socalculated shall be refunded within one month of the retrieval ofthe plot.

v. If the Transferee or his successor in interest has raisedconstruction on the plot after approval of the building plan, theApplicant who is now in possession of the house will be entitled,in case of retrieval of plot by LOA, to receive compensation forthe constructicn or any other development made by him asdetermined by the Chief Engineer, UO Wing, LOA. However, no

of 14

compensation for the structure will be payable in case thebUildin~s not approvedby the comp~tent.authority.

(Muha~'

Member, LDAC Chairman, LDACAnnounced

15.02.2018

o

of 14

before lahore development authority commission , …. no.81.pdf · muhammad saeed sio ch. ali...

Documents