ORDER :

1. Both the Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the order passed by the first Respondent dated 12.06.2017 thereby rejecting the appeal filed by both the petitioners and confirming the order passed by the second respondent dated 07.10.2015 thereby directing to pay stamp duty of Rs.9,21,271.50 and registration fee of Rs.9,213/- for the registration of the lease amendment deed dated 09.09.2016.

2. The petitioner in W.P.No.7235 of 2018 is the lessor (hereinafter called as lessor) and the petitioner in W.P.No.6892 of 2018 is the lessee (hereinafter called as lessee).

3. The lessor had given lease in respect of office space having super built up area totalling an extent of 65,965.7 sq. ft. on ground plus five floors to the lessee with effect from 11.04.2017 for a period of 20 years by way of lease deed dated 28.03.2014. It was presented for registration before the second respondent on 22.07.2014 and was registered vide document No.103/2015. The stamp duty of Rs.1,20,86,405/- and the registration fee of Rs.20,305/- were paid at the time of registration.

4. Subsequently, the lessor and lessee identified a discrepancy in the recorded area of the demised premises under the lease deed wherein on physical verification, it was discovered that the area identified in the lease deed was greater than the area physically given on lease to the lessee. Therefore, both the lessor and lessee mutually agreed to execute an amendment agreement to rectify the discrepancy to reflect the actual area of the property which was given on lease to record a reduction in the area of the leasehold property from 65,965.7 sq. ft. to 61,418.10 sq. ft. Accordingly, they had entered into amendment agreement and the same was presented for registration before the second respondent on 15.12.2016 on payment of additional stamp duty at the rate of 1% under Article 35(a) of the Stamp Act amounting to Rs.9,213/-. However, it was kept pending as pending document No.P121 of 2016. Thereafter, the first respondent issued demand notice dated 18.01.2019 thereby demanded to pay Rs.1,15,16,000/- as stamp duty for the entire lease consideration once again from the lessor. Therefore, when the second respondent had impounded the amendment agreement for payment of deficit stamp duty and referred the matter to the first respondent under Section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act. After receipt of demand notice, the lessor issued reply notice on 27.02.2017. On receipt of the same, the first respondent called for the lessor to appear for enquiry on 10.04.2017. After hearing the lessor, the first respondent passed order dated 12.06.2017 which is impugned in these writ petitions holding that the amendment agreement is to be treated as fresh lease deed and rejected the appeals.

5. The lessee, as per the contractual obligations, as agreed in the amendment agreement, on 09.01.2018, has paid the alleged deficit stamp duty under protest. On receipt of the deficit stamp duty, the amendment agreement got registered by document No.210 of 2018. 6. The learned Counsel for the lessor submits that the amendment agreement cannot be treated as a lease agreement as the terms of lease can be defined under the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. It does not create any fresh transfer or right to attract stamp duty. As per the original lease deed, the stamp duty has been paid and it got registered. Further, the amendment agreement did not increase the consideration, extent or period in any manner nor did it transfer any new right in respect of any immovable property to the lessee. Therefore, it cannot be treated as an instrument and it does not require any stamp duty.

7. The learned Counsel for the lessor relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prasad Technology Park Pvt. Ltd. vs. Sub-Registrar and others,  2006 (1) SCC 473 wherein it is held that supplementary agreement to a lease when it did not bring any new transaction did not amount to a lease deed within Section 105 of the Trans