High Court Karnataka High Court

P K Prabhakar Rao vs The Deputy Commissioner on 27 May, 2011

Karnataka High Court
P K Prabhakar Rao vs The Deputy Commissioner on 27 May, 2011
Author: K.L.Manjunath


aw

impugned report made by the District Regietrar}.

Chikmagalur dated 17.7.2010 is.”””p-reduced at”

Annexure-B and further giye “direction ‘to’ they L

Deputy Commissioner, Chikmegaler”tou”valte’jthe
stamp duty according to Art@39 of tbewfiarnataka
Stamp Act on the document of each share but_not in
the manner now made contrary to law;_f ” W

This Petition ‘is coming’ on for “preliminary
hearing in B–Group this day;xthe_Court made the
following: a’ HVIV lV°V’=

t._… ….___–g.u……_..,.~

The Short fiuestion that arises in this writ

petition is wnet ie duty and penalty payable in
respect of vthe_ impugned document. Impugned

~document is a partition deed. District Registrar,

ifihikmagalur has called upon the petitioner to pay

Rs§9l;l2Sf¥ as stamp duty and penalty. This order

t,4’is called in question on the ground that as per

‘H: Art{39& of the Stamp Act District Registrar” has

‘\_riai;ed to compute the stamp duty payable by the

u”petitioner. According to him, Art,39 is

substituted wte.f. 1.4.1999 by Act No.6/99. When

it is a substitution. even if the partition

gt:/J

3
between the petitioner and his brother has taken
earlier, R-61 is bound to compute the stamp} as

per amended provision. Since the :,.__r;o’t

done, writ petition requires to be _al1<:.{'we€i=.Va'nd __the

order vide Annexure–C requires tAoA.jbe'ee,¢1ueehe§:ii._.1_

2. Accordingly, the pet’i,ii’ien sorder
dated 26.8.2010 vide.gnnexur§~é is hereby quashed.
Matter is remanded toithe.f’I§iisfri;cii’V__Registrar for

fresh computation in a<jr::o'r€ie'hc;e afwith the amended

provision of-.VL€'he:_.Ké\rnataka Stamp Act.

§é;;'L
§§§E3CE:

i’~_:§/070611