The main legal point established in the judgment is that the stamp duty payable on a lease deed should be calculated as 5% of 90% of the market value of the property, as per the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, and there is no distinction in the law based on the ownership of the property.

JUDGMENT :

Oral Judgment:

1. Rule. Respondents waive service. With the consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

2. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated 13th August, 2020 (for short the “impugned order”), passed by Respondent No.3 (Collector of Stamps, Andheri). The impugned order has sought to stamp an instrument of Lease dated 9th June, 2020 (for short the “said Lease Deed”), executed between the Petitioner and the Mumbai Metropolitan Region Development Authority (for short “MMRDA”) in the same manner as an instrument of conveyance. The Lease was in respect of plot No.C-65, admeasuring 12,486 sq. mtrs., bearing CTS No.4207/C/65, situated at Village Kolekalyan, Taluka Andheri, Mumbai Suburban District (for short the “said property”) owned by the MMRDA. This Lease was for a period of 80 years commencing from 9th June, 2020. It is the contention of the Petitioner that the impugned order is ex-facie and patently illegal and is a result of complete non-application of mind and is, therefore, liable to be set aside.

3. The Petitioner is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 2013 and is engaged in the business of real estate development. Respondent No.1 is the State of Maharashtra and Respondent No.2 is the Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Stamps and the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority appointed under the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (for short the “Stamp Act”). Respondent No.3 is the Collector of Stamps, Andheri, who has passed the impugned order and Respondent No.4 is the Joint Sub-Registrar, within whose jurisdiction the aforesaid Lease Deed dated 9th June, 2020 is required to be registered under the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908.

4. The facts in the present case are really undisputed. The MMRDA is the owner of the said property. On 8th March, 2019, MMRDA issued an advertisement with the information that it proposes to invite bids, inter alia, for transferring the said property by way of lease, as per the terms and conditions stipulated in that regard. Pursuant to this advertisement, an E-Tender dated 4th May, 2019 was floated by MMRDA. The reserve price (i.e. the minimum price fixed by MMRDA), was Rs.3,44,448/- per sq. mtr. of built-up area, which aggregated to Rs.2238,91,20,000/-. On 6th June, 2019, the Petitioner submitted its bid for taking on Lease the said property for an auction price equal to the reserve price. The Petitioner was the sole bidder. The bid of the Petitioner was scrutinised and the tender was concluded on 12th June, 2019. Thereafter, the MMRDA, at its 148th meeting held on 8th July, 2019, by Resolution No.1507, approved allotment of the said property to the Petitioner on a leasehold basis, as per the terms and conditions mentioned therein. The premium fixed by MMRDA for Lease of the said property was equal to the reserve price of Rs.2238,91,20,000/-. This entire lease premium has admittedly been paid by the Petitioner to the MMRDA on the dates, which are more particularly set out in the Lease Deed.

5. On the execution of the Lease Deed, on 10th June, 2020, the Petitioner paid an amount of Rs.100,75,10,400/- towards the stamp duty under Article 36(iv) read with Article 25(b) of Schedule I and Section 2(na) of the Stamp Act. Thereafter, on 12th June, 2020 the Petitioner filed Adjudication Case No.ADJ/1100900/224/2020 before Respondent No.3, under Section 31, for adjudication of stamp duty payable on the Lease Deed. According to the Petitioner, it had paid the correct amount of stamp duty and, therefore, requested that the Lease Deed be appropriately endorsed under section 32 of the Stamp Act.

6. Though, the Stamp Authorities accepted the amount of Rs.2238,91,20,000/- as the true market value of the said property, it calculated the stamp duty at 5% of 100% of the market value of the said property, instead of calculating it at 5% of 90% of the market value as per Article 36(iv). In fact, this was put forth before