A public auction conducted by the court is the most transparent method for determining market value, and the Collector of Stamps cannot reassess the value determined by the court.

JUDGMENT :

M.S. Karnik, J.

1. These Appeals challenge the order dated 27^th March 2019 passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court. The appellant-Pinak Bharat & Co. in Commercial Appeal (L) No.28626 of 2023 is aggrieved by that part of the impugned order which stipulates “if the sale price is at or below the valuation obtained, then the valuation will serve as the current market value” whereas the Appellant- the Collector of Stamps, Mumbai City in Commercial Appeal No.14 of 2024 challenges that part of the impugned order whereby it is held that the Collector of Stamps cannot determine true market value of a property sold in public auction conducted by Court and the valuation report obtained by the Court should be accepted. Since the common order is under challenge, the present appeals are disposed of by a common judgment and order.

2. We refer to the facts in Commercial Appeal (L) No.28626 of 2023. The Appellant No.1-Pinak Bharat & Co. (hereinafter referred to as “Pinak Bharat & Co.” for short) is a partnership firm and the Original Judgment Creditor. The Appellant No.2 is the partner of Appellant No.1 as well as the partner of M/s. Win Win Associates, a sister concern of Pinak Bharat & Co., in whose favour the sale of the subject property came to be confirmed vide Order dated 30^th October 2018 and the Certificate of Sale dated 30^th November 2018 came to be issued. Respondent No.1- Anil Ramrao Naik is the Original Judgment Debtor. Respondent No.2 is the Collector of Stamps (hereinafter referred to as “the Collector of Stamps”).

3. A few relevant facts material to the decision are :-

On 25th September 2015 an Award was passed in Arbitration proceedings against Anil Ramrao Naik (Respondent No.1) to pay Pinak Bharat & Co. a sum of Rs.3,50,30,150/- together with interest @ 12% p.a. from 22^nd February 2005 amounting to approximately Rs.9.39 crores. The Warrant of Sale was issued by this Court on 18^th October 2016 in Execution Application No.22 of 2016. The first auction was fixed when no bids were received. This Court on 17^th January 2018 passed an order reducing the reserve price from Rs.32.24 crores to Rs.25 crores. There were tenants situated in the property.

4. Learned Single Judge passed an order on 28^th February 2018 directing the Sheriff to conduct an auction sale after a gap of 45 days. Since no bids were received the reserve price was reduced to Rs.18 crores. On 3^rd May 2018 this Court directed the third auction to take place at a reduced price of Rs.15 crores.

5. The Appellant-Pinak Bharat & Co. was granted leave on 1^st August 2018 to participate in the third auction and to submit a bid. This Court on 24^th September 2018 confirmed the sale for Rs.15.30 crores in favour of Pinak Bharat and Co. The order dated 30^th October 2018 confirms that the entire balance purchase price is paid and after setting off the awarded decree amount of Rs.9,39,21,640/-, a sale is confirmed in favour of Appellant No.2-M/s. Win Win Associates. The Sale Certificate came to be issued in favour of M/s. Win Win Associates on 30^th November 2018 by this Court.

6. The said Sale Certificate dated 30^th November 2018 was impounded under Section 33 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”) by the Sub Registrar, Mumbai City on 24^th December 2018 and was sent to the Collector of Stamps for adjudication. The Collector of Stamps passed an interim order on 11^th April 2019 and thereafter a final order dated 11^th April 2019 thereby holding the market value of the property as Rs. 32.24 crores and the stamp duty payable as Rs.1,61,20,000/-. It was directed that penalty is also payable of Rs.6,44,800/-. The said order records that there are totally 60 tenants in the said property. The stamp duty is levied as per Article 16 read with Article25(b) of the said Act.

7. Pinak Bharat & Co. preferred an Appeal under Section 32B of the said Act to the Additional Controller of Stamps challenging the order dated 11^th April 2019 read with the co