CWP No.849 of 2009 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
C. W. P. No. 849 of 2009
Date of Decision: 12 - 10 - 2009
Jaswant Rai Thapar ....Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab and others ....Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
***
Present: Mr.Amit Rawal, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma, Addl.A.G., Punjab
for the respondents.
***
KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL)
The present writ petition has been filed to challenge order dated
27.2.2008, Annexure P6, passed by the Collector/Additional Deputy
Commissioner, Ludhiana whereby it was held that petitioner is bound to pay
Rs.5,76,865/- to make good the deficiency in stamp duty affixed on the sale
deed. Aggrieved against this order, an appeal was filed. The order of the
Collector was affirmed by the Divisional Commissioner, Patiala Division,
Patiala on 5.8.2008 by Annexure P8.
Mr.Amit Rawal, counsel for the petitioner has stated that
petitioner had purchased the property from Improvement Trust, Ludhiana,
therefore, on the sale deed executed, he is liable to pay the amount which he
had paid to the Improvement Trust, Ludhiana. To controvert this, Mr.Anil
CWP No.849 of 2009 [2]
Kumar Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab has relied upon a
Division Bench judgment of this Court in Sukhjit Singh Cheema,
Advocate v. Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority,
Chandigarh and others, 2009(1) R.C.R. (Civil) 337. It will be apposite
here to reproduce paras 14 and 15 of the above said judgment:-
“14. Though the sale consideration mentioned in the
letter of allotment or such like document cannot be disputed but
what would be proper stamp duty is required to be determined
in terms of Section 47-A of the Act which contemplates that it
is the market value of the property on the date of registration of
the instrument. Therefore, irrespective of sale consideration in
the letter of allotment, stamp duty would be payable on the
market value of the property determined in terms of Rule 3-A
of 1983 Rules prevalent at the time of registration of
instrument.
15. Though section 47-A of the Act came into operation
after the instrument of sale is registered but keeping in view the
statutory intent and the fact that such Collector’s rate has been
fixed in exercise of statutory powers, the same can be insisted
upon at the time of registration of instrument as well. Such
insistence would avoid disputes and payment of deficient duty
at the late stage.”
Mr.Amit Rawal appearing for the petitioner has stated that after
the amendment of rules, instructions were issued by the Financial
Commissioner Revenue and Secretary to Government of Punjab,
Department of Revenue and Rehabilitation on 2.3.2009 wherein an
CWP No.849 of 2009 [3]
explanation was added and it was stated therein that where the consideration
amount has been paid and the sale deed is to be executed in favour of the
original allottee, that stamp duty shall be valid for registration of the
document upon the amount for which it was allotted by the
Government/Semi Government Organisation. Mr.Rawal has further stated
that thereafter another notification has been issued by the Government on
28.5.2009 in which the following explanation has been added:-
“Explanation.- The consideration amount fixed at the time of
allotment of immovable property by any Government/Semi
Government Organisation shall be deemed to be the Collector’s
rate and the stamp duty shall be charged for registration of
document upon the consideration amount fixed by the
Government/Semi Government Organisation, provided that
document is got registered by the original allottee upto 2nd
September, 2009 from issue of this notification or within three
months from the payment of last regular installment as per
schedule of payment of such allotment.”
Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab
has relied upon a judgment of this Court in `Amarjit Singh Chahal v. State
of Punjab and others,, Civil Writ Petition No.13088 of 2009, decided on
26.8.2009, and has urged that in the above-said case, this Court has relied
upon a judgment rendered in Central Warehousing Corporation v. State
of Punjab and others, Civil Writ Petition No.4426 of 2008, decided on
27.7.2009, wherein it was concluded that the `Explanation’ relied upon by
Mr.Rawal has no retrospective operation but is prospective in nature.
At this stage, Mr.Rawal has stated that due to various
CWP No.849 of 2009 [4]
explanations issued by the State from time to time, State has failed to ensure
certainty regarding the payment to be made by the allottee of the property
which was purchased from the Government organisations, therefore,
petitioner has been put to great distress and lot of inconvenience and has to
pay 8 per cent interest. Mr.Rawal further submit that petitioner is suffering
from cancer, a disease which is fatal in nature. Mr.Rawal has urged that
taking this as humantarian concern, this Court should allow the petitioner to
make the payment by way of installments.
Mr.Anil Kumar Sharma has stated that State being a welfare
State is sympathetic towards human misery and, therefore, he will not
seriously oppose this prayer of Mr.Rawal, provided an undertaking is filed
by the petitioner that he shall not pursue this litigation further and make the
payment without any default. Mr.Rawal has expressed his agreement.
Having heard counsel for the parties, I am of the view that
present writ petition can be disposed of with a direction that the petitioner
will file an undertaking before the Collector/Additional Deputy
commissioner, Ludhiana stating that he will make good the deficiency in
stamp duty in four annual installments along with interest without any
default. The undertaking shall also state that petitioner will not put the State
to further litigation.
In view of the observations made above, the present writ
petition is disposed of.
( KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA )
October 12, 2009. JUDGE
RC