CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
Dr. A.M. Singhvi, Senior Counsel
Raymond Ltd. Mumbai and Another v. State of Chhattisgarh and Others
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge against jurisdiction of the board of revenue (Para 1 , 6 , 9) |
| 2. details regarding the sale and stamp duty of the cement division (Para 3 , 5 , 12) |
| 3. confirmation of jurisdiction and authority of the board of revenue (Para 21 , 24 , 27) |
1. The petitioners have preferred this writ petition under Art. 226/227 read with Arts. 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India by which they have challenged the order dated 25th July, 2003 passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur. The Board of Revenue has held that the Board of Revenue being the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority has every jurisdiction to entertain a revision application under S.56(4) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short 'Stamp Act') as amended by the State of Madhya Pradesh, against the order dated 16-1-2001 passed by the Collector of the Stamp District Janjgir Champa under S.32 of the Act after following the procedure as envisaged under S.31 of the .
2. The petitioner's petition is that the petitioner No.1 established a cement division at Gopalnagar, District Janjgir Champa in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in the year 1982. The Govt. of Madhya Pradesh welcomed the se
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.