Back
1999 Supreme(All) 839
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Binod Kumar Roy and Yatindra Singh, JJ.
HAR PYARI AND OTHERS - Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT REGISTRAR (UNDER REGISTRATION ACT), ALIGARH - Respondents
C. M. W. P. 3435 Of 1990
Decided On : 05/27/1999
S.U.KHAN
The relevant date for calculating the stamp duty on a sale deed executed by the court in pursuance of a decree is the date of execution of the sale deed.
Headnote:
STAMP DUTY - RELEVANT DATE - AGREEMENT TO SELL - SALE-DEED - SECTION 47A OF THE INDIAN STAMP ACT, 1899 - APPLICABILITY - PENALTY - REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY - INTERPRETATION AND APPLICATION.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner's predecessor-in-interest executed a sale deed in favor of Shyam Lal as security for a loan. Shyam Lal executed an agreement to sell in favor of the predecessor-in-interest for the same amount. Shyam Lal failed to execute the sale deed even after the loan was repaid. A suit for specific performance was filed and decreed. The court executed the sale deed on 30.5.1989. The Sub-Registrar reported that the stamp duty paid was deficient. The District Registrar imposed a deficiency of Rs. 29,725 and a penalty of Rs. 500 under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the relevant date for calculating the stamp duty is the date of execution of the sale deed, not the date of the agreement to sell. Section 47A of the Act was applicable as the market value shown in the sale deed was much less than the minimum value determined under the rules. However, the penalty imposed under Section 47A was set aside as it was not permissible in proceedings under that section. The court also found that the petitioners were not given a reasonable opportunity to show cause as to the correct market value of the property.
Issues: 1. What is the relevant date for calculating the stamp duty on a sale deed executed by the court in pursuance of a decree? 2. Can a penalty be imposed under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899? 3. Was the petitioner given a reasonable opportunity to show cause as to the correct market value of the property?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The relevant date for calculating the stamp duty on a sale deed executed by the court in pursuance of a decree is the date of execution of the sale deed. 2. No penalty can be imposed under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. 3. The petitioner was not given a reasonable opportunity to show cause as to the correct market value of the property.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order imposing the deficiency and penalty, and directed that the market value of the property be re-determined after giving a reasonable opportunity to the petitioners. The stamp duty will be payable on the market value of the property as on 30.5.1989, the date when the court executed the sale deed.
( 1 ) THIS petition raises many interesting questions. But what is the relevant date for calculating the stamp duty? is the most important of all. These questions arise in this writ petition which is in fact, for quashing of the order dated 20. 6. 1989 passed by respondent No. 1, directing the recovery of deficiency in the stamp fee. though the relief is not so claimed. It is differently worded. FACTS
( 2 ) SRI Pannalal. predecessor-in-inferest of the petitioner was the owner of the 1/6 share in plot no. 1533 area 1 Bigha, 1 Biswa pukhta and 1553. area 14 biswa pukhta situate in Nagla Tikoni chandaria, Allgarh (hereinafter referred to as the property ). He approached one Sri Shyam Lal for advancing a loan of Rs. 2,000. There was mutual understanding between the two. Sri Shyam lal advanced the loan of Rs. 2,000 and Sri Pannalal executed a sale-deed on 10. 5. 1972 of the property in his favour for Rs. 2. 000, The same day Sri Shyamlal executed an agreement to sell in favour of Sri Pannalal for the same amount, i. e. . for Rs. 2,000 ; the entire transaction was a kind of security. Sri Shyamlal did not execute the sale-deed even when Sri Parma Lal offered to pay back the amount. Ultimately a suit was filed against Sri Shyamlal for specific performance of the agreement. The trial court decreed the suit. The District Judge. Aligarh. dismissed the appeal on 15. 11. 1979. It was sometime In between Sri Pannalal and Sri Shamlal (the dates are not clear from the records) died and legal heirs were substituted In their place. Petitioners took proceeding for execution. The Court executed the sale-deed on 30. 5. 1989. It was presented before the sub-Registrar, Tehsll Roll, Aligarh for registration. He sent a report on 2. 6. 1989 to the District registrar (Respondent No. 1 ). The report says that the value of the property sold has been shown to Rs. 8. 000 only whereas its value is Rs. 1,77,500 ; there is deficiency in the payment of the stamp duty ; the matter may be Investigated under Section 47a (1) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1989 (The Act for short ).
( 3 ) THE respondent No. 1 by his order dated 20. 6. 1989 has held that the value of the property on 30. 5. 1989 was Rs. 2,13,000 : the required stamp duty has not been paid. The deficiency of the stamp duty according to him was to the tune of Rs. 29,725. A penalty of Rs. 500 was also imposed ; recovery proceedings were started. This order says that a notice was sent to the petitioners, but they chose not to appear before respondent No. 1. Petitioners dispute this fact. According to them no notice was served. They have filed application to recall the recovery proceeding on 21. 8. 1989. It is still pending. There is nothing on the record to show if any order has been passed on this application, but the recovery proceedings continued. The petitioners then filed the present writ petition praying that deficiency or penalty on the sale-deed executed by the court, may not be recovered from him. POINTS FOR DETERMINATION
( 4 ) WE heard the counsel for the parties. Following points arise for determination in the case. (i) What is the nature of execution when the Court executes a document? (ii) What is the relevant date for calculating the stamp duty? is it the date of execution of the agreement to sell or the date of execution of the sale-deed? (iii) What is the scope of Section 47a of the Act? Can the present proceeding be initiated? (iv) Can penalty be imposed under Section 47a? (v) Was petitioner given reasonable opportunity before deciding the deficiency in the stamp duty? ist Point--THE NATURE OF execution OF A DOCUMENT BY the COURT
( 5 ) SRI Syamlal or his heirs did not execute the sale deed. The Court executed it in pursuance of a decree. The Order XXI of the Civil Procedure Code (C. P. C. for short) deals with the execution of a decree. The decree for execution of a document is dealt under Order XXI, Rule 34 of C. P. C. A decree holder is to deposit the copy of the draft with su
