SC Scraps Tardeo Agiary Land Deal
The Supreme Court recently scrapped the Tardeo Agiary land deal, citing, “there was no urgency to throw away the valuable property of the Trust. It would have defeated the very object of creation of the Trust for the preservation and protection of religion and Parsi culture.” Fourteen years after BC Batliwala Agiary Trustees sold the prime property in South Bombay to Astral Enterprises for a paltry Rs 2.95 crore, the apex court scrapped the deal, directing the Trustees to return the money to the builder and imposed a cost of Re. 1 lakh on the developer. The Court also reproached the Joint Charity Commissioner for its “perverse order” of not considering the interest, benefit and protection of the Trust. Filed by community member Cyrus Rustom Patel, the Supreme Court declared the transaction “dubious”, as regards the throwaway price and said that the trustees acted in collusion with the developer, as no effort was made to ascertain the real market value of the property.
“The property is located in a prime location of the city (Malabar Hill division near Mumbai Central station), and the market value was obviously sky high as compared to paltry sum offered. This is a prestigious locality, where one would cherish to own a property, and in the true sense, it would be like a treasure house. We unhesitatingly take judicial notice of the fact that such a huge area could not have been sold for a paltry sum of Rs 2.95 crore. Trustees, as well as joint commissioner, have failed to act in the interest, benefit and to protect the Trust,” said the apex court division bench of Justices, Arun Mishra and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar.
Established in 1865, the Batliwala Agiary at Tardeo celebrated its 152nd anniversary early this month. It stands on a 3,012 square metre plot and includes the fire temple building and adjoining structures with 21 tenants. The Trust first entered into a joint venture with Astral Enterprises in 2003 to develop the adjoining chawl, but also left an option to sell it. According to the development agreement, tenants were to be rehoused, temple renovated, and 33% of the built-up area would be given to the Trust out of the balance FSI. The trustees reasoned that no other builder was coming forth to develop the property and since it was in a dilapidated condition, the decision was taken in the best interests of the trust to sell the property. They also requested the Charity Commissioner (CC) to waive the mandatory public notice.
