Jaipur:<\/strong> The Rajasthan High Court in the recent judgement ruled that the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) could not reduce a 99-year lease to 25 years after accepting the full consideration and issuing a licence for the longer tenure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Justice Vinod Kumar Bharwani observed that the formal lease deed could not subsequently alter the lease period that had already been granted to the petitioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The dispute concerned a petrol pump site in Malviya Nagar, Jaipur. Though the original 1995 auction terms mentioned a 25-year lease, the petitioner claimed that JDA officials had assured bidders that the lease would be for 99 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The petitioner emerged as the highest bidder and paid the auction amount, lease charges and other applicable dues.<\/p>\n\n\n\n JDA subsequently issued a licence deed in August 1995 for 99 years. However, when the formal lease deed was executed in August 2003, it restricted the lease period to 25 years.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The petitioner challenged the shorter lease, arguing that under the Rajasthan Municipalities (Disposal of Urban Land) Rules, urban land was ordinarily to be leased for 99 years, while a shorter tenure required prior approval of the State Government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n JDA argued that the 25-year period was part of the original auction terms and that the registered lease deed superseded the earlier licence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court rejected contention of JDA, while holding that the formal lease deed was meant to record the arrangement already finalised and could not be used to reduce or alter the 99-year tenure, particularly after JDA had accepted the full consideration.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court held that the applicable Rules contemplated a 99-year lease, and any shorter tenure required the prescribed approval of the State Government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The court noted that no such prior approval had been obtained which was a mandate as per the rules laid.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court also took note of the State Government\u2019s earlier admission that the lease had been reduced from 99 years to 25 years without the required approval.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court also rejected JDA\u2019s objection regarding delay, noting that the petitioner had continued to pursue remedies after the 2003 lease deed and had approached the JDA Appellate Tribunal in 2008.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The Court observed that JDA\u2019s own mistake could not prejudice the Petitioner.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The High Court accordingly allowed the petition and directed the JDA to restore the lease to 99 years from the original date of allotment and issue a fresh lease deed and also directed to complete the formalities withing one month.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Court directs JDA to restore 99-year lease after finding the 25-year term was imposed despite acceptance of full consideration without the approval by State. Jaipur: The Rajasthan High Court in the recent judgement ruled that the Jaipur Development Authority (JDA) could not reduce a 99-year lease to 25 years after accepting the full consideration and … Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":9735,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_wppp_is_locked":false,"_wppp_selected_plans":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[69,29],"tags":[3167,3166,3170,1639,1642,3169,3165,2077,3160,300,3168,3162,3158,3157,659,43,150,3164,3159,3161],"class_list":["post-9734","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-rajasthan-high-court","category-top-stories","tag-auction-property","tag-disposal-of-urban-land","tag-full-consideration","tag-jaipur-development-authority","tag-jda","tag-land-allotment","tag-lease-deed","tag-lease-dispute","tag-lease-tenure","tag-legal-news-india","tag-licence-deed","tag-malviya-nagar-jaipur","tag-ninety-nine-year-lease","tag-petrol-pump-lease","tag-rajasthan-hc","tag-rajasthan-high-court","tag-rajasthan-legal-news","tag-state-government-approval","tag-twenty-five-year-lease","tag-urban-land-lease"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9734"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":9736,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9734\/revisions\/9736"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9735"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9734"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9734"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawsandlegals.com\/english\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9734"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}Lease Terms Changed After Auction<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
JDA Could Not Alter the Agreed Tenure<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
No prior approval of State<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
JDA\u2019s Delay plea Rejected<\/h4>\n\n\n\n