Back
2021 Supreme(MP) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BENCH
Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J.
Bindia Chawla and Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Miscellaneous Petition No. 2116 of 2020
Decided On : 02-02-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Shobhit Aditya, Advocate
For the Respondent: Aman Pandey, Panel Lawyer
The need for reasons in administrative, quasi-judicial, and judicial orders, and the requirement of providing adequate reasons for interference with quasi-judicial orders.
Headnote:
Stamp Duty - Gift Deeds - Stamp Act - 2013-14 Policy, Clause 4(i) - 16@1 jdck 0-35 [kkuwxkao xkze dksgsfQtk rglhy gqtwj ftyk Hkksiky nku djus dk mYys[k - [kkuwxkao ,sfj;k ds vuqlkj dh tkuk pkfg;s FkhA mi;qZDr foospuk ds vuqØe esa v/khuLFk U;k;ky; dk vkns'k fnukad 29-01-2015 =qfViw.kZ gksus ls fujLr fd;k tkrk gSA vihy Lohdkj dh tkrh gSA v/khuLFk U;k;ky; vihykFkhZ }kjk iwoZ esa vnk fd;k x;k eqnzkad 'kqYd tks [kkuwxkao ,fj;k ds vuqlkj fn;k x;k gS mfpr gksus ls nLrkost iath;r djsa vkSn vihykFkhZ dks iath;u mijkUr nLrkost okfil Ánku djsaA** - The court discussed the relevant policy of 2013-14 and Clause 4(i) of the policy, emphasizing the need for reasons in administrative, quasi-judicial, and judicial orders. The court found that the Board of Revenue had not provided adequate reasons for interfering with the order of the Additional Commissioner, and set aside the Board's order, remanding the matter back for fresh adjudication.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition against the order of the Board of Revenue, Gwalior, challenging the additional stamp duty imposed on gift deeds. The Deputy Registrar referred the matter to the Collector of Stamps, Bhopal, who held the gift deed was undervalued and directed payment of additional stamp duty. The Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, set aside the Collector's order, but the Board of Revenue set aside the Additional Commissioner's order without providing adequate reasons.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Board of Revenue had not provided adequate reasons for interfering with the order of the Additional Commissioner, and set aside the Board's order, remanding the matter back for fresh adjudication.
Issues: The issues revolved around the valuation of gift deeds and the imposition of additional stamp duty, as well as the adequacy of reasons provided by the Board of Revenue for setting aside the order of the Additional Commissioner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for reasons in administrative, quasi-judicial, and judicial orders, and found that the Board of Revenue had not provided adequate reasons for interfering with the order of the Additional Commissioner.
Final Decision: The court set aside the order of the Board of Revenue and remanded the matter back for fresh adjudication.
JUDGMENT :
Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia, J.
Heard through Video Conferencing.
1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 6.2.2019 passed by the Board of Revenue, Gwalior (M.P) in Case No. PBR/Appeal/Bhopal/Stamp Act/2018/365.
2. According to the petitioner, the facts necessary for disposal of the present petition in short are that two different gift deeds were executed by the petitioner No. 2 in favour of the petitioner No. 1. The proper stamp duty was paid as per the valuation of the property. However, the Deputy Registrar referred the matter to the Collector of Stamps, Bhopal for adjudication as he was of the view that the gift deeds were under-valued and the proper stamp duty has not been paid. The Collector, Stamps by order dated 29.1.2015 passed in Case No. 32/B-305/13-14 held that the gift deed in question was under-valued and directed for payment of an additional stamp duty of Rs. 8,59,000/-.
3. Being aggrieved by the order of Collector, Stamps, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal, who by order dated 24.11.2015, after considering various aspects i.e. like location of property as well as the prevailing valuation etc., came to the conclusion that the petitioners had paid the proper stamp duty and set aside the order of the Collector, Stamps.
4. The order of the Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division, Bhopal was challenged by the respondent before the Board of Revenue and the Board of Revenue without assigning any cogent reason has set aside the order of the Additional Commissioner Bhopal Division, Bhopal.
5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that a similar order was passed by the Board of Revenue in respect of another gift deed, which was challenged by the petitioners by filing Miscellaneous Petition No. 2117/2020 (Smt. Bindia Chawla & Others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh) which has been disposed of by this Court vide order dated 4.8.2020, thereby remanding the matter back to the Board of Revenue for adjudication of the controversy afresh. Accordingly, it is prayed that this matter may also be disposed of in the light of the order passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Petition No. 2117/2020 (Smt. Bindia Chawla & Others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh) decided on 4.8.2020.
6. The learned Panel Lawyer for the State could not point out any distinguishable feature and also conceded that the order passed by this Court in Miscellaneous Petition No. 2117/2020 (Smt. Bindia Chawla & Others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh) decided on 4.8.2020 would cover the present controversy also.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
8. In Miscellaneous Petition No. 2117/2020 (Smt. Bindia Chawla & Others Versus State of Madhya Pradesh) decided on 4.8.2020, this Court has passed the following orders:-
"Heard through Video Conferencing.
Shri Shobhitaditya, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Akshay Pawar, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondent-State.
With the consent, finally heard.
This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution assails the order dated 06.02.2019 (Annexure P/6) passed by Board of Revenue (Board).
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners filed Case No. 371/Appeal/14-15 before learned Additional Commissioner, Bhopal Division feeling aggrieved by order dated 29.01.2015 passed by learned Collector of Stamp whereby the said authority directed to pay Rs. 8,59,800/- by holding that gift deed is not properly stamped.
Shri Shobhitaditya, learned counsel for the petitioners by taking this Court to the findings of learned Additional Commissioner urged that the said finding is based upon the relevant policy of 2013-14. The said authority has considered the location of land and the method of its assessment for the purpose of determining the stamp duty. The Additional Commissioner has given a specific finding which is based on relevant clause of the policy. The learned Board has
