SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1964 Supreme(SC) 319

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
26th November 1964
P.B. GAJENDRAGADKAR, C.J.I., M. HIDAYATULLAH, J.C. SHAH, S.M. SIKRI AND R.S. BACHAWAT, JJ.
The Board of Revenue, U.P., Appellant
Versus
Rai Saheb Sidhnath Mehrotra, Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 526 of 1962.
Advocates appeared
C. B. Agarwala Senior Advocate, (O. P. Rana with him), for Appellant; A. V. Viswanatha Sastri, Senior Advocate, (J. P. Goyal with him), for Respondent.

Advocates:
A.V.VISHWANATHA SASTRI, C.B.AGARWAL, J.P.GOYAL, O.P.RANA

Headnote:“sale of property subject to a mortgage”

        – if the mortgage money has been paid off by the vendee before the date of the sale as part of the consideration, it would be included in the amount leviable with stamp duty under the Article 23, but not under the explanation. If the mortgage money has been paid off by the date of conveyance, the explanation does not require to be added to the consideration. It is only the unpaid mortgage that is deemed to be part of the consideration, as held in Board of Revenue U.P. v. Sidhnath Mehrotra, AIR 1965 SC 1092 = 1965(2) SCR 269.

       

Judgment

SIKRI, J. :

This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Allahabad in a refernece under S. 57 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Board of Revenue referred the following questions to the High Court :

(1) Whether the document is a sale deed for a consideration of Rs. 1,00,000 as contended by the executants.

(2) Whether in view of the provisions of Section 24 of the Stamp Act, the sale consideration shall be deemed to be Rs. 5,55,000 and duty liable to be paid thereon as held by the Board.

(3) Whether the consideration of the sale will be deemed to be Rs. Ten Lakhs, i.e., the entire amount due to the mortgagee Bank, and duty is payable thereon.

(4) On what amount is the additional stamp duty under Section 107 of the Kanpur Development Act, 1945, leviable. The High Court gave the following answer to the first three questions :

"The document in question is a sale deed for a consideration of Rs. 1,00,000 only and that the stamp duty payable in respect of it was to be calculated on the amount and not on any higher amount."

2. The appellant, the Board of Revenue, challenges the answer given by the High Court to the said three questions. We may mention that the answer to the fourth question is not the subject-matter of appeal before us.

3. The relevant facts are as follows: The respondent is one of the executants of the deed dated December 15, 1952. The executants, hereinafter referred to as the venodrs, were lessees of two plots of land and on these plots they had constructed an oil mill, known as Sri Govind Oil Mills, as Ice and Cold Storage Factory, and buildings in which the factories stood. The Ice and Cold Storage Factory was being run by the vendors in partnership with Shyam Sunder Gupta and Satya Prakash Gupta. The vendors had equitably mortgaged these properties with the Chartered Bank of India, and a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 was due to the Bank. In order to pay off the debt, the vendors entered into a contract with Messrs Oil Corporation of India Ltd., hereinafter referred to as the vendees, for the sale of the lands, buildings, plants, machinery and stores and goodwill of the Govind Oil Mills and Ice and Cold Storage Factory for a sum of Rs. 5,55,000, made up as follows; Rs. 1,12,000 for the plant and machinery and goodwill of the Ice and Cold Storage Factory, Rs. 3,00,000 for the machinery of Sri Govind Oil Mills, Rs.25,000 for stores, Rs. 18,000 for goodwill and Rs. 1,00,000 for the buildings and the lessee rights in the plots. Out of this Rs. 66,000 was payable to Messrs Shyam Sunder Gupta and Satya Parkash Gupta in respect of their share in the Kanpur Ice and Cold Storage Factory and the remainder to the vendors.

4. The Chartered Bank agreed to release from its charge the properties to be conveyed to the vendees provided a sum of Rs. 5,00,000 was paid to it. The vendees agreed to pay the said Bank a sum of Rs. 4,89,000, while the vendors agreed to pay Rs. 11,000 to the Bank to make up the balance.

5. In pursuance of this agreement, the vendors handed over the possession of plant and machinery of the two factories to the vendees, who paid before December 15, 1952, Rs. 3,89,000 to the said Bank. On December 15, 1952, the sale deed in respect of the buildings and the lessee rights was executed. Clause 2 of the deed provided that

"the vendees hereby declare that the properties hereby conveyed are free from all encumbrances except the charge in favour of the Chartered Bank of India, Australia and China. The Mall, Kanpur, which would be paid off so far as the properties hereby conveyed are concerned in the manner set forth above."

6. On these facts, Mr. C. B. Aggarwala, the learned counsel for the appellant, contends that on a true interpretation of S. 24 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the consideration for the purpose of calculating ad valorem duty is either Rs. 10,00,000 or Rs. 5,55,000 or at least Rs. 1,11,000.

Section 24 reads thus :

"Where any property is transferred to any person in consideration, w




















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top