SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2008 Supreme(All) 454

SUDHIR AGARWAL
ANIL KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH – Respondent


Advocates:
Counsel :
Narendra Mohan and Harish Chandra Mishra for the Petitioners; S.C. for the Respondents.

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Aggrieved by the order dated 18.10.2004 passed by Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Jhansi (respondent No. 3) and 6.1.2005 passed by Commissioner, Jhansi Division (respondent No. 2), the petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari for quashing the said orders whereby the respondents have determined the market value of the property in question purchased by the petitioners to be Rs. 17,74,000/- on which the deficiency of stamp to the tune of Rs. 1,11,900 has also been determined and the petitioners have been required to pay the same alongwith a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- and 1.5% monthly interest on the entire amount from the date of execution of the sale deed.

2. The petitioners, Anil Kumar Jain and Satish Chandra Kohli have purchased land at plots No. 1650, 1651, 1652, 1653, 1654, 1655, 1656, 1657, 1658, 1659, 1660, 1661, 1662, 1663 and 1664 measuring, in total area 0.887 hectare situated at Village Raksa, Tahsil and District Jhansi vide sale deed dated 12.4.2004 for consideration of Rs. 1,00,000/- though paid stamp duty at thrice the circle rate deter



























Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top