Back
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
MR. R. NATARAJ, J
SMT. NAINA SHETTY – Appellant
Versus
THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION OF KARNATAKA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. ownership and valuation of property in dispute. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. contentions regarding market valuation and lease effects. (Para 4 , 8) |
| 3. legal stance of government representation on valuation. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 4. taxation principles for stamp duty and valuation definitions. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. final judgment and dismissal of writ petition. (Para 16 , 17 , 18) |
ORAL ORDER
The petitioner has challenged an order bearing No. J¸ï n ¦ (C)/11/2020 dated 06.04.2021 issued by the respondent No.1 rejecting an appeal filed under Section 45A (5) of the Karnataka Stamp Act , 1957 (for short, ‘the Act, 1957’). She has also challenged the order bearing No.f£ÉÆç/MVD/JGN/15/16- 17 dated 06.02.2020 passed by the respondent No.2 determining the deficit stamp duty and the deficit registration charges payable, to the extent it is prejudicial to her interest. She has sought for a writ in the nature of mandamus to direct the respondent No.3 to accept the valuation of the property as arrived at by her and collect the stamp duty and registration charges on the property and register the sale deed dated 08.07.2016 in her name. She has also sought for a writ in the nature of mandam
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
