Loading...

Karamshibhai vs State on 26 August, 2008

Gujarat High Court
Karamshibhai vs State on 26 August, 2008
Author: Jayant Patel,&Nbsp;
   Gujarat High Court Case Information System 

  
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/1063020/2008	 3/ 3	JUDGMENT 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 10630 of 2008
 

 
For
Approval and Signature:  
 
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
 
 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

1
		
		 
			 

Whether
			Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

2
		
		 
			 

To
			be referred to the Reporter or not ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

3
		
		 
			 

Whether
			their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

4
		
		 
			 

Whether
			this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
			interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
			made thereunder ?
		
	

 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

5
		
		 
			 

Whether
			it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
		
	

 

 
=========================================================


 

KARAMSHIBHAI
SHAMJIBHAI KAKADIYA & 1 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

STATE
OF GUJARAT THROUGH SECRETARY & 2 - Respondent(s)
 

=========================================================
Appearance : 
MR
BM MANGUKIYA for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2.MS BELA A
PRAJAPATI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. 
MS BHAVIKA KOTECHA, AGP for
Respondent(s) : 1, 
None for Respondent(s) : 2 -
3. 
=========================================================


 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HONOURABLE
			MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 26/08/2008 

 

 
ORAL
JUDGMENT

Rule.

Ms. Kotecha, learned AGP waives notice of rule.

In
the present petition, the challenge of the petitioners is against
the order passed by the Deputy Collector dated 17.02.2003
(Annexure-D) for assessment of deficit Stamp Duty of Rs.1,10,420/-
with penalty of Rs.250/- and Rs.500/-, total Rs.1,11,120/- and its
confirmation thereof by the appellate authority vide order dated
01.12.2007 (Annexure-E) in Appeal No.68/07.

Mr.Parikh,
learned AGP under the instruction of GP states that the State
Government has taken decision to reconsider all cases, where the
Deputy Collector has exercised the power in mechanical manner,
without considering the facts and circumstances pertaining to all
document presented prior to December 2006. However, learned Asst.
Government Pleader states that the matter may be remanded to the
Deputy Collector as if the appeal is allowed, and Deputy Collector
shall decide the matter afresh. She only submitted that the
petitioners may appear before the Deputy Collector within two weeks
from today.

As
the document is presented prior to cutoff date, the present case
would be covered in the general policy and the declaration made on
behalf of the State Government, which has been recorded in Special
Civil Application No.10177 of 2008, decided on 08.08.2008.

In
view of the above declaration made on behalf of the State
Government, the impugned order passed by the Deputy Collector for
assessment of the stamp duty as well as the order of Appellate
Authority confirming the order of the Deputy Collector is quashed
and set aside with the direction that the matter shall stand
restored to the Deputy Collector.

The
petitioners shall appear before the Deputy Collector within two
weeks from today. The Deputy Collector shall decide the matter in
accordance with law after giving opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners and shall pass the order.

It
is hardly required to be clarified that when the order is quashed,
there shall not be any recovery until afresh order is passed by the
Deputy Collector. In the event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by
afresh order, which may be passed by the Deputy Collector, the
petitioner may resort to remedy as may be permissible in law.

The
petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute
accordingly. D.S.

(JAYANT PATEL, J.)

*bjoy

   

Top

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information