168 Pa. Super. 143 | Pa. Super. Ct. | 1951
Opinion by
These two appeals involve the right of an owner to redeem land acquired by a county for unpaid taxes where the county commissioners sold such property at public sale, without an order of court, under section 17 of the Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as last amended by the Act of May 24, 1945, P. L. 945, §2, 72 PS §5971q.
The appeals concern two properties: the one at 204 Jeffrey Street, Chester, Delaware County, assessed to Homer and Henrietta Holland, and' the other at 1227 Central Avenue, Chester, Delaware County, assessed to John and Mary Breakley. The facts material to each
The Holland property was exposed to sale by the County Treasurer of Delaware County on May 8, 1947, for delinquent taxes for 1943, and purchased by the County Commissioners of Delaware County in their official capacity, in the absence of bidders, on the same day. In like manner the Breakley property was purchased by the Commissioners on April 29, 1943, at county treasurer’s sale for delinquent county taxes for the year 1937. The owners did not redeem within the two year period, and, after due advertisement, the Commissioners, on April 19, 1950, exposed each property to public sale under the provisions of section 17 of the Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS §5971q.
After argument before the court in banc the court below held that, under section 17 of the Act of 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS §5971q, the owners had ten days after the date of sale to redeem; and it entered judgment in favor of the County of Delaware but ordered the Commissioners to issue certificates of redemption to the former owners upon the payment of the costs of the proceedings.
Under section 17 of the Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS §5971q, county commissioners are authorized to sell property purchased
We are of the opinion that this proviso in section 17, giving “any owner of the property so sold” the right to redeem “within ten days after the date of the said sale,” applies equally to all public sales by county commissioners as authorized in this section. We find no reason for construing the word “sale” in the proviso otherwise. On the contrary, there are many reasons why the ten-day redemption period should apply generally. There is less likelihood of an owner’s right of redemption being lost by default in a public sale ordered by the court than in a public sale by the county commissioners without a court order. In the court ordered sale all parties interested are given notice; in the sale without order of court the Act does not provide for any notice by the commissioners except by advertisement. Obviously the right of redemption is not waived by receipt of notice of sale. Under the former, where the purchaser takes the property free and discharged of all tax and municipal claims, liens, mortgages, charges and estates of whatsoever kind, advantages might accrue to the owner which he would not have under the latter if he had no equal right Of redemption. If there is any quéstion as to the legislative intent, we should liberally construe the right of redemption as provided in section 17, as the privilege of redemption has always been so construed in Pennsylvania under the various- Acts regulating tax -sales.
We are not unmindful of appellant’s argument to the effect that the legislative history of section 17 gives support to its contention that the proviso should be strictly construed and confined to what immediately precedes it; but, as we view it, the section when considered in its entirety clearly indicates the legislative intent to have the right of redemption apply to a public sale by county commissioners without a court order as well as to a public sale by them after court order under this section of the Act. See section 73 of the Act of May 28, 1937, P. L. 1019, 46 PS §573. The construction for which appellant argues would produce an unjustifiable and discriminatory result. See sections 52 (1) and 58 of the Act of May 28, 1937, P. L. 1019, 46 PS §552 (1) and §558. In section 17 the paragraph following the proviso reads as follows: “After such sale, the county commissioners shall make and deliver a deed, being acknowledged before an officer authorized to acknowledge deeds. Where the sale is made without securing an order of court, as aforesaid, such deed shall pass such title as the county commissioners have a right to convey, but where the sale is made after securing an order, as aforesaid, such deed shall pass title free, clear and discharged of all tax and municipal claims, liens, mortgages, charges and estates of whatsoever kind.” This indicates, as the court below points out, that the legislature did not intend to differentiate between a public sale without court order and a public salé with court Order, after fixing upset price, except with Reference to the kind of a title the .county, commissioners convey by deed to the buyer.
■ .Although the point was . not before- us, our reference to the redemption provision . of section .17. o.f the Act of. May 29,. 1931,. P. L.. 280, .as amended,
The judgments and orders in the respective appeals are affirmed.
The Commissioners of Delaware County elected not to proceed under the Deal Estate Tax Sale Law of July 7, 1947, P. L. 1368, 72 PS §5860.101 et seq., as permitted by section 1 of that Act.
See section 10 of tlie Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS §5971j.
A commissioners’ official public sale, like a sheriff’s sale, becomes final when the hammer falls, but this is subject to the statutory provision in the Act of May 29, 1931, P. L. 280, as amended, 72 PS §5971g, authorizing redemption, whereby the sale may •'■be- set aside. Superior Mining- Company Property Taé Sale-, 359 Pa. .357, 362, 59. A,.2d 301.; ,;....... . ; ..