IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, J.
Smt. Rachana Aswal & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 2052 of 2023 and CM APPL. 7765 of 2023
Decided On : 26-04-2023
Stamp Duty - Conveyance Deed - Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Section 54(c)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner and her deceased husband had purchased e-stamp paper for the execution of a conveyance deed for a flat. Due to the husband's demise and the e-stamp paper being more than six months old, the petitioner sought refund or permission to use the e-stamp paper for the conveyance deed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the e-stamp paper, jointly purchased by the petitioner and her deceased husband, should be permitted for use in the execution of the conveyance deed, as there is no expiry date for e-stamp paper and the genuineness of the paper is not in question.
Issues: The main issue was whether the six-month limitation period for refund under Section 54(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 would apply in this case or not.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Thiruvengada Pillai v. Navaneethammal, which held that there is no expiry date for use of a stamp paper and the six-month limitation period is only for seeking refund, not for the use of the stamp paper.
Final Decision: The court directed the return of the original e-stamp paper to the petitioner and ordered the execution of the conveyance deed on the already jointly purchased e-stamp paper, considering the extenuating circumstances of the case.
Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. The Petitioner No.1- Ms. Rachana Aswal who is the wife of Late Mr. Deependar Singh Patni (`the deceased'), along with the two minor children Petitioner No. 2-Master Aarav Singh Patni and Petitioner No. 3-Master Atharv Singh Patni has filed the present petition seeking the following prayer:
"a. issue a writ/order or direction in the nature of mandamus, certiorari directing issuance of fresh e- Stamp papers or in the alternate refund of entire amount alongwith interest accrued thereon @ 12 % per annum to the Petitioners enabling the Petitioners to purchase e-stamp paper afresh to Respondent no.1
b. direct Respondent No.2 to execute Conveyance Deed
in favour of the Petitioners as expeditiously as possible upon Petitioners furnishing fresh e-Stamp Paper issued by Respondent No.1; and
c. Pass any such further order(s) as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case"
3. The Petitioner and her deceased husband, had applied with the Respondent No. 2-DDA for an MIG flat and were allotted Flat no. 544, Fourth Floor, Pocket-2, Sector-19, Phase 1, Dwarka, New Delhi (`said premises'). A total consideration of Rs.79,73,360/- has been paid on 26th January 2019. The Petitioner and the deceased had purchased e-stamp paper for the value of Rs.3,98,700/- on 28th June 2019 for completion of the purchase formalities and for execution of the conveyance deed qua the said premises in their favour. The date was fixed for execution of the conveyance deed by the Respondent No. 2-DDA on 3rd March, 2020, however, with the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic the said date was moved vide communication dated 25th August, 2020 to 23rd September 2020. In the meantime, during the second wave of COVID-19 pandemic, the husband of the Petitioner unfortunately passed away on 11th May, 2021. The Petitioner, meanwhile, has had to complete various formalities and, finally, obtained mutation qua the said premises from the Respondent No. 2-DDA on 22nd November, 2022 in favour of herself and her two minor children.
4. The difficulty that the Petitioners now face is that the e-stamp paper which is now purchased, is more than six months old and the Petitioner, therefore, either seeks refund of the stamp duty or for directions to the Respondent No. 2-DDA to execute the conveyance deed on the basis of the earlier purchased e-stamp paper itself.
5. Notice was issued in this matter and Mr. Satyakam, ld. Counsel for the Respondent No. 1-GNCTD has filed an affidavit on record submitting that refund cannot be permitted in view of Section 54(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 which prescribes a six months period from the date of purchase for an application for refund to be made. On the other hand, Mr. Manish, ld. Counsel for the Petitioner relies upon the decisions of this Court in Rohit Khurana v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi, [2022/DHC/005485] and also the judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajeev Nohwar v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Maharashtra State, Pune, [C.A 5970/21 decision dated 21st September 2021] to establish that the e-stamp paper has not expired in terms of Section 54(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
6. Heard ld. counsels for the parties.
7. A perusal of the present petition would show that the Court is dealing with extenuating circumstances owing to two reasons. Firstly, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and, secondly, the demise of the Petitioner's husband in whose name the e-stamp paper was jointly purchased by the Petitioner No.1 on 28th June 2019.
8. There is no doubt as to the fact that the e-stamp paper dated 28th June 2019 was in fact purchased and stamped in both the names of the Petitioner and the deceased. Upon the demise of the husband, obviously, the e-stamp paper cannot be rendered completely redundant and useless inasmuch as the Petitioner being the joint purchaser, should be permitted to use the e-stamp paper for the purpose of
AI
There is no expiry date for e-stamp paper use, and the six-month limitation period under Section 54(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 is only for seeking refund, not for the use of the stamp paper.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of timely remedy and the need to condone delay in certain circumstances, as emphasized by the court in the context of refund applica....
Refund application under Section 54 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, must be considered from the date of a court order permitting refund, not the date of stamp purchase, due to unique case facts.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, should be interpreted in a manner that upholds equity and fairness, and that the application of ....
E-registration fees under the Indian Stamp Act are refundable if not utilized, mandating timely processing of refund claims by authorities.
State must not deny legitimate claims based on technical limitations; courts favor justice and equitable treatment.
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.