ORDER:

This Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking the following relief:-

“...to issue a Writ, order, direction especially one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the proceedings No.1221/2009 SRO/Patamata, dated 27.02.2017, asking the petitioner to pay the deficit Stamp duty of Rs.4,39,900/-, U/s 49 (b) of Schedule I-A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 by the 3rd respondent, as illegal, unjust, arbitrary, violation of provision of Indian Stamp Act, 1899, violation of Principles of Natural Justice and also violation of Article 300A of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the same and pass...”.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the subject property belongs to the 1st petitioner’s father i.e, Venkata Ramaiah, being a self acquired property and after his death on 03.01.2008, the property devolved to his legal heirs. Thereafter, the petitioner’s mother-2nd petitioner herein, along with the petitioner’s sister i.e., Vallabhaneni Lakshmi executed a gift deed dated 06.04.2009, conveying the property mentioned in gift deed in favour of the 1st petitioner.

3. While so, the 3rd respondent issued notice dated

26.03.2016, under Section 41-A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899 informing the petitioners to appear before him on 13.04.2016 for payment of deficit stamp duty as if it is a second notice on 09.04.2016. Though the petitioners did not receive first notice, however, on receiving the second notice dated 26.03.2016, the petitioners have submitted two independent representations on 11.04.2016. The 1st petitioner, in his representation stated that as he had undergone an open heart surgery, he could not travel such a long distance, whereas, the 2nd petitioner stated that she cannot undertake travel for long distance because of her age. The said representations were received by the respondent No.3- District Registrar herein, on 13.04.2016, for which there was no response from the 3rd respondent.

4. However, after recovering from his illness, the 1st petitioner submitted another representation dated 11.08.2016, sent through Registered Post, informing that his mother i.e., 2nd petitioner herein got married to his father after the death of his natural mother as per Hindu customs and therefore, she falls under the definition of mother. However, the 2nd respondent- District Collector herein, without considering the objections made by petitioner, has passed the impugned proceedings under Section 41-A on 27.02.2017.

5. When the matter came up for admission on

28.07.2017, this Court was not pleased to grant any interim order.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and as well as the learned Government Pleader for Revenue.

7. No Counter Affidavit has been filed by the respondents. For proper appreciation of the case, this Court feels it relevant to refer to Section 41-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, which reads as follows:

“41A. Recovery of Stamp Duty not levied or short levied:-

(1) Whereafter the commencement of the Indian Stamp (Andhra Pradesh Amendment) Act, 1986, any instrument chargeable with duty has not been duly stamped and registered by any Registering Officer by mistake and remarked as such by the Collector or any audit party, the Collector may, within five years from the date of registration serve a notice on the person by whom the duty was payable requiring him to show cause why the proper duty or [the amount required to make up the deficit stamp duty should not be collected from him along with a penalty of three times of the deficit stamp duty].

Provided that where the non-payment was by reason or fraud, collusion or any wilful misstatement or suppression of facts or contravention of any of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duty, the Collector may, within twenty years from the date of registration, serve a notice on such person to show cause why the amount required to make up the deficit stamp duty should not be collected from him