JUDGMENT :

Prashant Kumar Mishra, J

Both these appeals are interconnected and, therefore, they are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment.

2. Writ Appeal No.17 of 2022 is preferred by the State and registration authorities against the order dated 24.01.2020 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.15400 of 2018, directing the Sub-Registrar, Gunadala, Vijayawada Region, Krishna District, to receive the sale certificate dated 02.12.2017 issued by Tata Capital Financial Services Limited and register the same in favour of the writ petitioner as per the value shown in the sale certificate as market value, for determination of stamp duty, and release the document within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. As there is a delay of 627 days in filing the appeal, I.A.No.1 of 2022 has been filed seeking condonation of the said delay.

3. In Writ Appeal No.22 of 2022 also, the State and registration authorities are the appellants and the said appeal is directed against the order dated 14.09.2021 passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.No.20142 of 2021, allowing the said writ petition in terms of the order dated 24.01.2020 in W.P.No.15400 of 2018.

4. The relevant facts, which are necessary for the purpose of consideration of the issue in the present appeals, are as follows: The petitioner in W.P.No.15400 of 2018, namely, Marvel Financial Services Limited, has purchased a property in an auction conducted by Tata Capital Financial Services Limited under the provisions of the Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short, ‘the SARFAESI Act’). After the sale certificate was issued in its favour, Marvel Financial Services Limited has presented the same for registration, but the registration authorities refused to register the same stating that the company has to enter into a proper sale deed with the vendor and pay the stamp duty on the market value but not on the value mentioned in the sale certificate since the market value was much higher than the value mentioned in the sale certificate. In such circumstances, W.P.No.15400 of 2018 came to be filed. While deciding the said writ petition, the learned single Judge relied upon the common order dated 24.01.2014 passed by this Court in W.P.Nos.17600 of 2011 & 32791 of 2013 (Indian Bank, ARM Branch, Coimbatore v. Sub-Registrar, Nagari Mandal; K.S. Devarajan v. State of A.P.), to hold that no separate deed of transfer is required and the valuation mentioned in the sale certificate would be the criteria to determine the stamp duty payable for registration and, thus, the writ petitioner is not required to pay stamp duty equivalent to the market value fixed by the authorities. Accordingly, W.P.No.15400 of 2018 was allowed with the directions as already noted in the second paragraph. While so, after the said order was passed, the name of the company has been changed from ‘Marvel Financial Services Limited’ to ‘Marvel Hostings Private Limited’. Contending that though the fact regarding change of name of the company as per the procedure has been brought to the notice of the registration authorities, they refused to register the sale certificate as per the directions issued in W.P.No.15400 of 2018 and demanded payment of stamp duty on market value, the Marvel Hostings Private Limited preferred W.P.No.20142 of 2021. When the said writ petition was taken up for hearing before the learned single Judge, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Stamps & Registration submitted that the issue involved is squarely covered by the earlier order dated 24.01.2020 passed in W.P.No.15400 of 2018. In view of the said submission made by both the sides, the learned single Judge allowed W.P.No.20142 of 2021 in terms of the order dated 24.01.2020 passed in W.P.No.15400 of 2018. Thereafter, the State has preferred the present appeals against the orders passed in both t