IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.A. Sayed, J.
Akshay Vitta Management and Investment Consultancy Services Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. – Appellants
Vs.
State of Maharashtra and Ors. – Respondents
Writ Petition No. 2762 of 2014
Decided On : 21.04.2015
Indian Registration Act - Deed of Conveyance - Sections 23, 25 - The court held that the period taken for adjudication of the document should be excluded while calculating the period of eight months for presenting the document for registration. The court also directed the petitioners to pay a fine for the delay beyond four months and ordered the authorities to proceed with the registration upon payment of the fine.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought registration of a Deed of Conveyance dated 31 December 2009, which was declined by the respondents on the ground of delay in presentation for registration.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the period taken for adjudication of the document should be excluded while calculating the period of eight months for presenting the document for registration. The court also directed the petitioners to pay a fine for the delay beyond four months and ordered the authorities to proceed with the registration upon payment of the fine.
Issues: The main issue was whether the delay in presenting the Deed of Conveyance for registration was justifiable and whether the period taken for adjudication should be excluded while calculating the period of eight months for presentation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the period taken for adjudication of the document should be excluded while calculating the period of eight months for presenting the document for registration.
Final Decision: The petition was allowed, and the court directed the petitioners to pay a fine for the delay beyond four months and ordered the authorities to proceed with the registration upon payment of the fine.
A.A. Sayed, J.
1. By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned two orders, both dated 25 July 2014. By the impugned orders, the respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 respectively declined to register the Deed of Conveyance dated 31 December 2009 on the ground that more than the eight months had elapsed from the date of execution of the Deed of Conveyance, which is the time stipulated for presentation of a document for registration under sections 23 and 25 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. Under a Deed of Conveyance dated 31 December 2009, the petitioners had acquired certain land and building from one Jimmy Minu Batty. The total consideration under the said Deed of Conveyance was Rs. 65,00,000/- (Rupees Sixty-five Lakhs only). On 15 April 2010, the petitioners submitted the Deed of Conveyance to the Collector of Stamps for adjudication and determination of stamp duty payable thereon in terms of section 31 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 (now Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958). The petitioners had calculated the stamp duty at the time of execution of the Deed of Conveyance at Rs. 3,25,000/- (Rupees Three Lakhs and Twenty-Five Thousand only) and paid the said amount accordingly. After a period of about 3 years & 10 months, on 25 February 2014, an adjudication order came to be passed making a demand for additional stamp duty amount and penalty. According to the petitioners, the Collector of Stamps adjudicated the Deed of Conveyance and determined the deficit stamp duty at Rs. 74,200/-, on which penalty of Rs. 7,420/- was imposed. On 1 March 2014, the petitioners paid the deficit stamp duty of Rs. 74,200/- and the penalty of Rs. 7,420/-, aggregating to Rs. 81,620/- by way of e-stamping and an endorsement to that effect was made on the Deed of Conveyance which reflects the receipt of the entire amount.
2. According to the petitioners, the Deed of Conveyance duly adjudicated and endorsed was received by them on 12 March 2014. On 25 July 2014, the petitioners forwarded the Deed of Conveyance under cover of their letter to the respondent No. 2 and respondent No. 3 for the purpose of registration. Respondent No. 2, however, by the impugned order dated 25 July 2014 declined to register the Deed of Conveyance on the ground that it was presented beyond the time prescribed under sections 23 & 25 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908. Respondent No. 3 also by the impugned order of even date viz. 25 July 2014, declined to register the Deed of Conveyance on the same ground. Hence this petition.
3. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned AGP. It would, at the out set, be appropriate to set out the relevant dates and events/particulars. The same are as under:
| Sr. No. | Date | Particulars | Remarks |
| 1. | 31.12.2009 | Deed of Conveyance executed | 31.12.2009 to 15.4.2010 – 3 months |
| 2. | 15.4.2010 | Deed of Conveyance Submitted to the Collector of Stamps for adjudication | 15.4.2010 to 12.3.2014 – 3 years 10 months and 25 days (Time to be excluded, according to petitioners) |
| 3. | 25.2.2014 | Order of Adjudication was passed stipulating a deficit in stamp duty of Rs.74,200/- on which a penalty of Rs.7,420/- was payable totaling Rs.61,620/- |
|
| 4. | 1.3.2014 | The deficit stamp duty was paid by way of e-stamping |
|
| 5. | 12.3.2014 | The Deed of Conveyance was duly adjudicated was received by the petitioners | 12.3.2014 to 25.7.2014 – 4 months 13 days |
| 6. | 25.7.2014 | The Deed of Conveyance was forwarded to the Sub-Registrar pose of Registration |
|
Sections 23 & 25 of the Indian Registration Act 1908, are relevant for our purposes. They read as under:
23. Time for presenting documents
Subject to the provisions contained in sections 24, 25 and 26, no document other than a will shall be accepted for registration unless prese
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.