Back
G. S. SANDHAWALIA, HARPREET KAUR JEEWAN
State of Punjab – Appellant
Versus
Sukhdev Singh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. background of property purchase and related disputes. (Para 1 , 3) |
| 2. arguments regarding maintainability and notification applicability. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. court's considerations on alternative remedies and jurisdiction. (Para 6 , 12 , 14) |
| 4. court's observations on the legal framework and its implications. (Para 7 , 8 , 13 , 15) |
| 5. interpretation and implications of section 47-a of the stamp act. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 6. final order allowing statutory remedy. (Para 16) |
JUDGMENT
Harpreet Kaur Jeewan, J.
Present Letter Patents Appeal filed by the State is directed against the judgment dated 09.4.2014 whereby the writ petition bearing No.6949 of 2011 filed by the respondent for quashing the impugned order dated 08.08.2008 (Annexure P-3) passed by the District Collector, Sangrur and notice dated 28.12.2009 (Annexure P-6) passed by Sub Registrar, Bhawanigarh was allowed.
2.1 Respondent (petitioner in CWP) has alleged that his grandfather Shri Jang Singh purchased a plot No.4 in Mandi Township Bhawanigarh in open auction on 13.11.1968 for a sum of Rs.10,200/- from Punjab Agricultural and Marketing Board. The allotment letter was issued in favour of the grandfather of the responde
The Collector must follow due process and provide notice before determining stamp duty; reliance on ex-parte inspections without evidence contravenes procedural laws.
The court established that the authority's power to recover deficit stamp duty is limited to a period of five years from the date of execution of the instrument, as per the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
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
