{"id":247072,"date":"1997-03-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1997-03-17T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997"},"modified":"2016-07-09T21:23:15","modified_gmt":"2016-07-09T15:53:15","slug":"nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","title":{"rendered":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997"},"content":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n
Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997<\/div>\n
Author: S Agrawal<\/div>\n
Bench: S.C. Agrawal, S. Saghir Ahmad<\/div>\n
           PETITIONER:\nNAGPUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nNAGPUR TIMBER MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION & ANR.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t18\/03\/1997\n\nBENCH:\nS.C. AGRAWAL, S. SAGHIR AHMAD\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n
\t    [WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. .2036 OF 1997
\n     (arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No. 5594 of 1993)]
\n\t\t      J U D G M E N T
\nS.C. AGRAWAL, J.\n<\/p>\n
     Special leave granted.\n<\/p>\n
     These appeals raise common questions for consideration.
\nThe Nagpur Improvement Trust, the appellant herein, has been
\nconstituted under  the provisions  of the Nagpur Improvement
\nTrust Act,  1936 enacted  to  provide  for  improvement\t and
\nexpansion  of  the  town  of  Nagpur.  The  said  Act  makes
\nprovisions for\tacquisition of land by the Improvement Trust
\nin connection  with various  schemes which are framed by the
\nImprovement Trust. After development the land is disposed of
\nby the\tImprovement Trust.  The disposal  of lands vested in
\nthe Improvement\t Trust is governed by the Nagpur Improvement
\nTrust (Land  Disposal) Rules,  1955 (hereinafter referred to
\nas ‘the Rules’) made by the State Government, in exercise of
\npowers conferred  by Section  76 read with Section 89 of the
\nNagpur Improvement  Trust Act,\t1936. Rule  3  provides\t for
\ntransfer  of   land  of\t Improvement  Trust  by\t (a)  direct
\nnegotiation with  party; (b)  public  action;  (c)  inviting
\ntenders; and  (d) concessional rates. Rule 4 prescribes that
\nthe land  shall be  disposed of\t at a premium to be fixed in
\naccordance  with   the\tprovisions   contained\ttherein.  In
\naddition to the amount of premium, the annually. Rule 7 lays
\ndown that  every  transfer  of\tImprovement  Trust.  If\t the
\npurchaser  by\tan  application\t  in  writing  requests\t the
\nImprovement Trust to convert the period of lease from thirty
\nyears to  ninety nine years, the Improvement Trust may do so
\nafter charging\tin addition  15% of  the premium  fixed\t for
\nthirty years of lease with proportionate increase in annual
\nground\trent.\tIn  certain   specified\t circumstances\t the
\nImprovement Trust  can dispose\tof land\t by outright sale or
\nexchange. Rule\t9 of  the Rules,  which is  relevant for the
\npurpose of this case, reads as under :-\n<\/p>\n
     “Rule  9.\tWhere  land  revenue  is
\n     payable in\t respect of  any plot so
\n     transferred such land revenue shall
\n     be payable by the Trust.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     The other\tprovisions of  the Rules  have no bearing on
\nthe matter in issue.\n<\/p>\n
     The respondents in these appeals are lessees in respect
\nof lands  of the Improvement Trust. Under the terms of Lease
\nDeed they are liable to pay the amount prescribed therein as
\npremium and  ground rent  periodically. Clause\t1(b) of\t the
\nLease Deed contains the following provision :-\n<\/p>\n
     “(b) The  lessee shall from time to
\n     time and  at all  times during  the
\n     said term\tpay  and  discharge  all
\n     rates,    taxes\t charges     and
\n     assessments of every description or
\n     imposed upon  the said  land hereby
\n     demised  or  the  building\t erected
\n     thereupon or  upon the  landlord or
\n     tenant in respect thereof.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
     In\t 1978\tthe  Government\t  of  Maharashtra  initiated
\nproceedings for\t assessment and recovery of non-agricultural
\nassessment charges  under the  provisions of the Maharashtra
\nLand Revenue  Code, 1996  (hereinafter referred\t to as\t‘the
\nLand Revenue  Code’). Non-agricultural assessment charges in
\nrespect\t of  the  plots\t which\thad  been  allotted  by\t the
\nImprovement Trust to the respondent-lessees were demanded by
\nthe  State   Government\t from  the  Improvement\t Trust.\t The
\nImprovement Trust,  as per  clause 1(b)\t of the\t Lease\tDeed
\nasked  the   lessees  to   the\tmake  payment  of  the\tnon-
\nagricultural assessment\t charges in  respect of their lands.
\nThe respondents\t and filed Writ Petitions in the Bombay High
\nCourt Nagpur  Bench, challenging  the said  demand  of\tnon-
\nagricultural assessment\t from them. The Writ Petitions which
\nhave given  rise to  Special Leave  Petitions  (Civil)\tNos.
\n11018-23 of  1992 were\tdisposed of  by the  High Court by a
\ncommon judgment\t dated September  3, 1991  whereby the\tHigh
\nCourt has  allowed the\tsaid Writ  Petitions and has quashed
\nthe recovery notices issued by the Improvement Trust and has
\nrestrained the\tImprovement Trust  from making\trecovery  of
\nnon-agricultural assessment  from the plot holders, like the
\nrespondents or\ttheir members.\tThe High Court has held that
\nnon-agricultural assessment  is nothing but land revenue and
\nin view\t of Rule  9 of\tthe Rules  the Improvement  Trust is
\nliable to  pay the same and it could not recover it from the
\nlessees. The High Court has further held that clause 1(b) of
\nthe Lease  Deed does  not include payment of land revenue by
\nthe  lessees   of  plots  held\tby  them  and  that  such  a
\nconstruction of\t the said clause would be in consonance with
\nRule 9\tof  the\t Rules\tand  that  if  the  said  clause  is
\ninterpreted to\tinclude even  land  revenue  then  the\tsaid
\nclause would  be against Rule 9 which provides that the land
\nrevenue of  the plot  transferred to  the  lessees  is\tmade
\npayable by  the Improvement  Trust and\tno one else and that
\nthe burden  that is  statutoril fixed under Rule 9 cannot be
\nshifted to others as is sought to be done by the Improvement
\nTrust. The  High Court\thas also  observed  that  since\t the
\nrespondents or their member had no notice about the fixation
\nor assessment beir undertaken, they could not participate in
\nthose proceeding  and that  the Improvement  Trust failed to
\nget proper  fixated done  because it took no interest in the
\nproceedings and\t the in\t these\tcircumstances  no  liability
\ncould be fastened up the lessees.\n<\/p>\n
     Writ Petition No. 2351 of 1982, which has given rise to
\nSpecial\t Leave\tPetition  (Civil)  No.\t5594  of  1993,\t was
\ndisposed  of  by  the  High  Court  by\tits  judgment  dated
\nSeptember 6, 1991 on the basis of the earlier judgment dated
\nSeptember 3, 1991 referred to above.\n<\/p>\n
     Shri V.A.\tBobde, the  learned senior counsel appearing
\nfor the Improvement Trust, has urged that the High Court was
\nin error in holding that non-agricultural assessment is land
\nrevenue Trust  alone which  is bound to pay the said charges
\nand it\tcannot require\tthe lessees  to pay  the same.\tShri
\nBobde has  also placed\treliance on clause 1(b) of the Lease
\nDeed  and  has\tsubmitted  that\t the  Improvement  Trust  is
\nentitled to  require the lessees to pay the non-agricultural
\nassessment that\t is being  recovered by the State Government
\nfrom the  Improvement Trust  and that  the High Court was in
\nerror in  holding that in view of Rule 9, clause 1(b) of the
\nLease Deed cannot be construed to impose such a liability on
\nthe lessees.\n<\/p>\n
     The learned counsel appearing for the respondents have,
\non the\tother hand,  urged that\t the High  Court has rightly
\nconstrued the  expression “land\t revenue” in  Rule 9  of the
\nRules to  include non-agricultural  assessment and  that  in
\nview of\t the mandate  in Rule 9, the Improvement Trust alone
\nis liable  to pay  non-agricultural assessment and it cannot
\npass on\t the liability\tfor the\t same to  the  lessees.\t The
\nsubmissions. of\t the learned  counsel is that clause 1(b) of
\nthe  Lease   Deed  cannot  be  construed  as  entitling\t the
\nImprovement Trust  to require  the lessees  to pay  the non-
\nagricultural assessment\t and that,  if\tclause\t1(b)  is  so
\nconstrued, it  would be\t inconsistent  with  the  provisions
\ncontained in Rule 9 of the Rules.\n<\/p>\n
     We will  first examine  the question  whether Rule 9 of
\nthe Rules  precludes the  Improvement Trust  to require\t the
\nrespondent-lessees to pay the amounts sought to be recovered
\nfrom the  improvement Trust  by the State Government as non-
\nagricultural assessment\t in respect  of the plots leased out
\nto the\trespondents. For  purpose, we  will proceed  on\t the
\nbasis that  the expression “land revenue” in Rule 9 includes
\nnon-agricultural assessment.  A perusal of Rule 9 shows that
\nit governs the relationship between the State Government and
\nthe Improvement\t Trust in  the matter  of recovery  of\tland
\nrevenue payable\t in respect  of lands  disposed of under the
\nRules. The  said Rule  imposes the liability for the payment
\nof land\t revenue in  respect of\t the lands disposed of under
\nthe Rules  on the  Improvement Trust. As a result, the State
\nGovernment can\trecover the  land revenue payable in respect
\nof the\tlands so  disposed of from the Improvement Trust and
\nit need\t not take  proceedings for  recovery  of  such\tland
\nrevenue from  the transferees of the lands that are disposed
\nof under  the  Rules.  But  that  does\tnot  mean  that\t the
\nImprovement Trust  cannot  pass\t on  its  liability  to\t the
\nlessees in  respect of the land revenue payable by it to the
\nState Government  in respect  of the  lands that  have\tbeen
\ntransferred to\tthe lessees.  The High\tCourt has  construed
\nRule 9 to mean that the land revenue in respect of the plots
\ntransferred to the lessees has to be paid by the Improvement
\nTrust and  no one  else and  that the  said burden  which is
\nstatutorily fixed  under Rule 9 cannot be shifted to others.
\nWe find\t no warrant  for adding\t the words  “no one else” in
\nRule  9\t so  as\t to  preclude  the  Improvement\t Trust\tfrom
\nrequiring the  lessees to  pay the  land revenue  which\t the
\nImprovement Trust is required to pay to the State Government
\nin respect  of the  lands that\thave been transferred to the
\nlessees. Under Section 114 of the Land Revenue Code the rate
\nof non-agricultural  assessment in respect of lands in urban
\nareas is  one-half the standard rate if the land is used for
\nthe purpose  of industry  and it is thrice the standard rate
\nin other urban areas if the land is used for the purposes of
\ncommerce. The  possibility cannot be excluded that amount of
\nthe non-agricultural  assessment payable  in respect  of the
\nplot of\t land disposed\tof by  the Improvement Trust may, in
\nthe course of time, exceed the amount of the premium that is
\npaid by the lessee at the time of grant of lease and, if the
\nImprovement Trust is precluded from recovering the amount of
\nnon-agricultural assessment  from the  lessee, it may end up
\npaying more  by way  of non-agricultural assessment than the
\namount received\t by it\tas premium  for the  land. By way of
\nillustration we\t may refer  to the  Lease Deed dated October
\n15, 1956  (Annexure ‘H’ to the S.L.P.) executed in favour of
\nArya Pratinidhi\t Sabha (petitioner in Writ Petition No. 2265
\nof 1982\t before the  High Court). The amount of premium paid
\nby the lessee was Rs. 6,534\/- in respect of a plot measuring
\n7,286 square  feet and\tthe ground  rent is Rs. 10 per year.
\nThe letter of demand dated May 29, 1982 (Annexure ‘I’ to the
\nS.L.P.) shows  that the\t non-agricultural assessment payable
\nin respect of the said plot @ Rs. 270.70 for the period from
\n1956 to\t 1982 was Rs. 7038\/-. The amount of non-agricultural
\nassessment payable  for the plot for the period from 1956 to
\n1982 thus  exceeds the\tpremium that  was  received  by\t the
\nImprovement Trust  from the  lessee. Surely  it could not be
\nthe intention  of the  rule making  authority in Rule 9 that
\nthe Improvement\t Trust shall  finance the lessees in respect
\nof lands  that are  disposed by\t the Improvement Trust under
\nthe Rules.\n<\/p>\n
     The High  Court has  also referred to the provisions of
\nRule 11\t of the\t Land Disposal\tRules, 1983  wherein  it  is
\nexpressly stated  that the  lessee during the continuance of
\nthe  lease   shall  pay\t  land\t revenue,   non-agricultural
\nassessment and\tcesses assessed\t or which may be assessed on
\nthe demised  land. The\tfact that  under Rule 11 of the Land
\nDisposal Rules,\t 1983 it  is  expressly\t provided  that\t the
\nlessee\tis  liable  to\tpay  land  revenue  non-agricultural
\nassessment in respect of land held by him does not mean that
\nin the\tabsence of  such an  express provision Rule 9 of the
\nRules must  be construed  to mean  that the  lessee  is\t not
\nliable\tto  pay\t land  revenue\tnon-agricultural  assessment
\nassessed on  the demised  land. As indicated earlier, we are
\nof the opinion that Rule 9 of the Rules did not preclude the
\nImprovement  Trust  from  recovering  from  the\t respondent-
\nlessees the amount of non-agricultural assessment payable by
\nit to the State Government in respect of lands leased out to
\nrespondent-lessees. Since  we have  held that  Rule 9 of the
\nRules did  not preclude the Improvement Trust from requiring
\nthe respondent-lessees to pay in respect of the lands leased
\nout  to\t  them\t non-agricultural   assessment\t which\t the
\nImprovement  Trust   was  required   to\t pay  to  the  State
\nGovernment, we do not consider it necessary to deal with the
\nquestion whether  the expression  “land revenue”  in Rule  9
\nincludes “non-agricultural assessment”.\n<\/p>\n
     The High Court has observed that liability could not be
\npassed on  to the  lessees because they had no notice of the
\nproceedings  regarding\t fixation  or\tassessment  of\tnon-
\nagricultural assessment\t and they  could not  participate in
\nthe proceedings.  It is\t no doubt  true that at the stage of
\nassessment of  amount of  non-agricultural assessment notice
\nhad only  been issued  to  the\tImprovement  Trust  and\t the
\nlessees had  no notice\tof the\tproceedings and\t they had no
\nopportunity of\tplacing\t their\tcase  before  the  concerned
\nauthorities. The grievance of the respondents in this regard
\nwould be  redressed if\tthey are  afforded an opportunity of
\nmaking their  representations against  determination of non-
\nagricultural assessment\t in respect  of plots  leased out to
\nthem and,  in case  such representations  are  made  by\t the
\nlessees,  the  same  are  given\t due  consideration  by\t the
\nconcerned authority.\n<\/p>\n
     In the  result, the  appeals are  allowed. The impugned
\njudgments of  the High\tCourt are  set aside  and  the\tWrit
\nPetitions filed\t by the\t respondents in\t the High  Court are
\ndisposed of  with the  direction that  it is permissible for
\nthe Improvement\t Trust to  require the respondent-lessees to
\npay the\t amount of non-agricultural assessment in respect of
\nthe lands  leased out to them. It would, however, be open to
\nthe respondents\t to  submit  their  representations  to\t the
\nconcerned  authority   against\tthe  determination  of\tnon-
\nagricultural assessment\t in respect  of lands  leased out to
\nthem and, if such representation is made within one month of
\nthis judgment,\tthe same shall be given due consideration by
\nthe concerned  authority and it should be disposed of within
\na period  of two  months from  the date of submission of the
\nrepresentation. The  recovery of non-agricultural assessment
\nshall not  be made from the respondent-lessee\/lessees making
\nthe representation till the representation is disposed of by
\nthe concerned authority. No order as to costs.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Supreme Court of India Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997 Author: S Agrawal Bench: S.C. Agrawal, S. Saghir Ahmad PETITIONER: NAGPUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST Vs. RESPONDENT: NAGPUR TIMBER MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION & ANR. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 18\/03\/1997 BENCH: S.C. AGRAWAL, S. SAGHIR AHMAD ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: [WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. .2036 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-247072","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"\nNagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997\",\"datePublished\":\"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\"},\"wordCount\":2311,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\",\"name\":\"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997","datePublished":"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997"},"wordCount":2311,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997","name":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants ... on 18 March, 1997 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1997-03-17T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-07-09T15:53:15+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/nagpur-improvement-trust-vs-nagpur-timber-merchants-on-18-march-1997#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Nagpur Improvement Trust vs Nagpur Timber Merchants … on 18 March, 1997"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247072","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=247072"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/247072\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=247072"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=247072"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=247072"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}