Relinquishment deeds executed among co-owners are classified as release deeds and not gifts for stamp duty, emphasizing family transactions free of economic consideration.

1. Through the present Appeal, the Appellant assails the correctness of an order passed on 20.05.2020 in W.P.(C) 3560/2018 [hereinafter referred to as ‘Impugned Order’], wherein the learned Single Judge has upheld the impounding of the Relinquishment Deeds [hereinafter referred to as ‘RDs’], on account of deficient stamp duty by treating them as Gift Deeds.

FACTUAL MATRIX

2. The dispute in the present case arises from the property bearing No. E-67, Greater Kailash, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘suit property’]. Late Shri Jagdish Prasad Sharma and late Smt. Shanti Devi, father and mother of the Appellant, respectively, jointly owned the suit property, with a half share each. On 24.09.2001, Appellant’s father executed a registered Will, in which he bequeathed his entire half share in the suit property in favour of the Appellant, Shri Ramesh Sharma. On 31.10.2003, Late Shri Jagdish Prasad Sharma passed away, leaving behind his widow, a son [Appellant herein], and five daughters.

3. Thus, now the suit property is jointly owned by the Appellant and his mother, with a half share each. Further, on 20.03.2013, Smt. Shanti Devi passed away, leaving behind the Appellant and his five sisters as the Class-I legal heirs.

4. On 03.07.2012, three sisters of the Appellant, namely Smt. Raj Adholia, Smt. Prema Sharma, and Smt. Karuna Mehta executed three separate RDs in favour of their brother, in the lifetime of their mother, and presented the same before the Sub-Registrar V-A, Mehrauli, New Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘Sub-Registrar’] on 06.07.2012 for registration. Further, on 17.07.2012, the remaining two sisters, namely, Smt. Dharamwati Joshi and Smt. Kaushik also executed their respective RDs in favour of the Appellant, also during the lifetime of their mother, and the same was presented before the Sub-Registrar for registration on the same date.

5. Vide a letter dated 17.07.2012 of Sub-Registrar addressed to the Collector of Stamps, Hauz Khas, Mehrauli, the Appellant received information that the aforesaid RDs have been impounded on the ground of being deficiently stamped.

6. Subsequently, on 01.03.2013, SDM, Kalkaji, Delhi [hereinafter referred to as ‘SDM KJ’], after perusing the written explanation of the Appellant, vide Order No. F-6/SDM(SV)/2013/447 concluded that the said five RDs, on the account of being presented for registration on two different dates, are chargeable for stamp duty under Article 23 of Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act, 18991. Pursuant thereto, acting in accordance with the Valuation Report submitted by the Tehsildar, Kalkaji, the SDM KJ, vide Order No. F-1/SDM/KJ/2013/2017 dated 15.05.2013, imposed the stamp duty of Rs.6,60,257/- along with a penalty of Rs.1,00,000/- upon the Appellant. Consequently, to avoid the immediate attachment of property, the Appellant deposited the aforesaid amount under protest vide challan dated 29.05.2013.

7. Further, an RTI application was filed before the SDM, Hauz Khas seeking details of RDs impounded between 01.01.2012 and 30.04.2012 on the ground that it is tantamount to a gift and is not sufficiently stamped. However, an unsatisfactory response was received, and consequently, an RTI Appeal was filed, but the Sub-Registrar again failed to provide the information.

8. Assailing the correctness of the orders dated 01.03.2013 & 15.05.2013 passed by the SDM KJ and unsatisfactory response to various RTI applications, the Appellant filed W.P.(C) 3560/2018 before the learned Singl