SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF DELHI
MANU NARANG & ANR – Appellant
Versus
THE LT. GOVERNOR, GOVERNMENT NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ORS – Respondent
WP(C)-5975_2013



W.P.(C) No.5975/2013, 3591/2014 & 10328/2015 Page 1 of 12

*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%

Date of decision: 23rd December, 2015

+

W.P.(C) No.5975/2013

MANU NARANG & ANR

..... Petitioners

Versus

THE LT. GOVERNOR, GOVERNMENT NATIONAL

CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ORS .... Respondents

+

W.P.(C) No.3591/2014, CM No.7330/2014 , CM No.16198/2014

(both for interim relief), CM No.6076/2015 (u/O-1 R-10 CPC) &

CM No.6094/2015 (u/S 151 CPC).

AMIT GUPTA

..... Petitioner

Versus

GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS.

..... Respondents

+

W.P.(C) No.10328/2015 & CM No.25753/2015 (for stay).

ATUL GUPTA

..... Petitioner

Versus

LT. GOVERNOR, NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY

OF DELHI AND ORS

..... Respondents

2015:DHC:10480-DB

W.P.(C) No.5975/2013, 3591/2014 & 10328/2015 Page 2 of 12

Counsels for the petitioners:-

Mr. Manav Gupta along with Ms. Esha Dutta, Advs. in W.P.(C)

No.5975/2013.

Mr. Kumar Dushyant Singh, Adv. in W.P.(C) No.10328/2015.

Mr. Arvind Datar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Anirudh Wadhwa along with Mr.

Vipul Kumar, Advs. in W.P.(C) No.3951/2014.

Counsels for the respondents:-

Mr. Sanjay Poddar, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Sanjoy Ghosh, ASC

Mr. Rakesh Mittal, Adv. for DDA.

Mr. Rahul Chaudhary, Adv. for R-5.

Ms. Mini Pushkarna with Ms. Yoothika Pallavi, Adv. for SDMC.

Ms.Uttara Babbar with Mr. Vinod Kapoor, Advs. in CM

No.2385/2015 in W.P.(C) No.3591/2014

Mr. Anshuman Sood, Adv. for Intervener.

Mr. Akshay Makhija, Standing Counsel with Mr. Vikas Bhadauria and

Ms. Mahima Behl, Advs. for UOI.

Mr. Rajeev Kumar Yadav, Adv. for Mr. Gaurang Kanth, Adv for

SDMC in W.P.(C) No.3591/2014.

CORAM:-

HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW

RAJIV SAHAI ENDLAW, J.

1. W.P.(C) No.5975/2013 was filed, (i) for declaration that the

policy/practice of construing the basements of residential properties at par

with the other floors for the purpose of evaluating the applicable stamp duty,

under the (a) Indian Stamp Act, 1899; (b) Delhi Stamp (Prevention of Under

Valuation of Instruments) Rules, 2007; and, (c) the Notification dated 4th

December, 2012, is violative of Articles 14 & 19 of the Constitution of

India; (ii) for a direction to the respondent Government of National Capital

2015:DHC:10480-DB

W.P.(C) No.5975/2013, 3591/2014 & 10328/2015 Page 3 of 12

Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) to prescribe for equitable stamp duty charges

applicable in case of sale/purchase of basements in residential properties

which are otherwise purely meant for parking or storage purposes; and, (iii)

for a direction to the respondent GNCTD to modify the existing method for

calculating the applicable stamp duty in case of sale of a floor of a

residential property by taking into consideration the maximum permissible

plinth area instead of the existing plinth area.

2. The petition was entertained and notice thereof issued.

3. W.P.(C) No.3591/2014 was filed in public interest for (i) declaration

that a) the Delhi Stamp (Prevention of Under-Valuation of Instruments)

Rules, 2007; b) the Circle Rate Notifications being Notification bb)

No.7.2(12)/Fin.(E.I)/Part File/Vol.1 (ii)/3548 dated 18th July, 2007; bbb)

No.F.1 (281)/Regn.Br./HQ/Div.Com./09/45 dated 4th February, 2011; and,

bbbb) No. F.1 (152)/Regn.Br./Div.Com./HQ/2011/780 dated 4th December,

2012 are beyond the scope of the Stamp Act as applicable to Delhi; (ii) for

declaration of the three Circle Rate Notifications aforesaid as discriminatory,

arbitrary, unreasonable and having been framed without proper application

of mind; (iii) for declaration that the e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top