PATNA HIGH COURT
Navaniti Prasad Singh, J.
Emarat Co-operative Housing
Versus
State Of Bihar
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8198 of 2007 ;
Decided On : SEPTEMBER 24, 2007
AIR 1986 SC 626, 1987 PLJR 926 AIR 1927 PC 135, AIR 1951 Bombay 205, AIR 1961 SC 1570-Referred to.
1. The present writ application has been filed for quashing the order of Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Govt. of Bihar, Patna (respondent no.2) as communicated to the District Sub-Registrar, Patna Sadar, Patna (respondent no.4) in respect to the petitioner and for a consequential relief directing the District Sub-Registrar, Patna Sadar, Patna to register the sale deed in favour of the petitioner with proper stamp duty and registration fee and other consequential relief.
2. Petitioner is a Co-operative Housing Society duly registered under the provisions of Society Registration Act, 1935 having its registered office at Patna. Respondent no.1 is the State of Bihar through the Secretary -cum-lnspector General of Registration, Department of Registration, Govt. of Bihar, respondent no.2 is the Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Govt. of Bihar, Patna, respondent no. 3 is the Registrar cum District Magistrate, Patna and respondent no. 4 is the District Sub-Registrar, Patna Sadar, Patna. Respondent no.5, private-respondent is the vendor, who is seeking to transfer his land, in question by way of sale to the petitioner and it is this purported sale deed that is the subject matter of dispute as to its proper valuation for the purposes of stamp duty and registration fee.
3. Respondent no.5 has appeared and supports the contention of the petitioner. Other respondents have also appeared and filed counter affidavit. Petitioner has filed rejoinder thereto.
4. With the consent of the parties this writ petition is being disposed of at the stage of admission itself after hearing the parties at length.
5. Petitioner had filed the draft sale deed in question before the respondent no.4 and sought his opinion as to the proper stamp duty and registration fee payable in respect thereof. The said respondent no.4- District Sub-Registrar, Patna Sadar, Patna forwarded the said draft sale deed by his letter no. 2445, dated 7.5.2007 (Annexure 5) to the Secretary cum Inspector General of Registration. Govt. of Bihar, Patna for his opinion and guidelines in the interest of revenue. While doing so, he had indicated the basic facts and the plea of the petitioner and thus sought the guidance from the Inspector General of Registration. By letter no. 1489, dated 20.5.2007 the Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Govt, of Bihar, Patna from the office of Inspector General of Registration conveyed the guidelines to the District Sub-Registrar (Annexure 6). By letter no. 2866 dated 6.6.2007 the District Sub-Registrar informed the petitioner of the decision of the Inspector General of Registration and asked the petitioner to act accordingly. Therefore it is the correctness or otherwise of the view as expressed by Inspector Genera! of Registration, Govt. of Bihar, Patna as contained in Annexure 6 and communicated by Annexure 7 for compliance that is in question.
6. The department has taken the stand that even though what is sought to be transferred by way of sale to petitioner by respondent no.5 is the said respondents land but as the land has now an apartment building thereon constructed by the petitioner himself at his own cost, the said conveyance would be valued for the purposes of stamp duty and registration fee by including the market value of the land sought to be conveyed along with the petitioners own building thereof. The correctness of this view is the subject matter of dispute.
17. A preliminary objection as to the maintainability of this writ petition was raised on behalf of the State, it was submitted that the petitioner had merely filed a draft sale deed and accompanying papers and sought an opinion as to proper value for the purposes of stamp duty and registration fee. The petitioner had not filed the final executed sale deed. The petitioner has no cause to challenge the opinion given from the office of Inspector General of Registration as the proper procedure was for the petitioner to file the executed sale deed w
M:s Filterco And Another V/s. Commissioner Of Sales Tax, M.P.And Another Reported In
Narayan Das Khettry V/s. Jatindra Nath Roy Chowdhary & Ors. Since Reported In
Bajrangbali Coke Briquetting Industries V/s. State Of Bihar Since Reported In
Bishan Das & Ors V/s. State Of Punjab And Others Since Reported In
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.