Back
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
Kastura Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
MOHIT KUMAR SHAH, J.:–The present writ petition has been filed seeking quashing of the order dated 03.06.1997, whereby and whereunder the District Magistrate, Patna has granted permission for registration, subject to deposit of stamp fees, as recommended by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Patna Sadar. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the appellate order dated 10.10.2017, passed by the learned court of Divisional Commissioner, Patna in Stamp Appeal no. 295 of 2008, whereby and whereunder the appeal of the petitioner has been rejected.
2. The legal issue raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner for consideration by this Court is that admittedly, the sale deed in question was registered on 14.07.1994, hence the District Sub-Registrar, Patna had no authority under the law to refer the matter pertaining to deficit court fees to the Collector, Patna, thus the reference made by the District Sub Registrar, Patna vide letter no. 995 dated 02.04.1996 is itself non est in the eyes of law.
3. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the unamended Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, which is reproduced hereinbelow :—
“47-A Instrument of convey
Post-registration assessment of deficit stamp duty is invalid if conducted beyond statutory time limits, confirming jurisdictional authority restrictions under the Indian Stamp Act.
Post-registration authority to determine stamp duty is limited by time constraints and must adhere to statutory provisions.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
