Gujarat High Court High Court

Sureshbhai vs Superintendent on 11 November, 2011

Gujarat High Court
Sureshbhai vs Superintendent on 11 November, 2011
Author: Abhilasha Kumari,
  
 Gujarat High Court Case Information System 
    
  
    

 
 
    	      
         
	    
		   Print
				          

  


	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	


 


	 

SCA/17008/2011	 2/ 2	ORDER 
 
 

	

 

IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
 

 


 

SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 17008 of 2011
 

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

SURESHBHAI
RANCHHODBHAI THAKKAR & 2 - Petitioner(s)
 

Versus
 

SUPERINTENDENT
OF STAMPS AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION & 2 -
Respondent(s)
 

=====================================================
 
Appearance : 
MS
MITA S PANCHAL for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 3. 
Ms.Asmita
Patel, learned ASST. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
respondents. 
=====================================================
 
	  
	 
	  
		 
			 

CORAM
			: 
			
		
		 
			 

HON'BLE
			SMT. JUSTICE ABHILASHA KUMARI
		
	

 

 
 


 

Date
: 11/11/2011 

 

 
 
ORAL
ORDER

1. Today
when the matter is taken up, Ms.Asmita Patel, learned Assistant
Government Pleader has made the following statement:

“In
view of the letter dated 09-08-2011 addressed by the Under Secretary,
Revenue Department, Gandhinagar to the office of Superintendent of
Stamps and Registration Inspector and upon instructions from Shri
Amrutlal V.Gameti, Deputy Inspector General of Registration, the
market value of the property in question involved in the petition
will be determined, taking into consideration the date of execution
of the document/instrument as a material date in accordance with the
provisions of Section 32A of the Bombay Stamps Act, 1958 read with
the provisions of the Bombay Stamp (Determination of Market Value of
Property) Rules, 1984, for the purpose of the payment of stamp duty.”

2. In
view of the above statement made by the learned Assistant Government
Pleader, the petition does not survive and is disposed of.

Liberty
is reserved to the petitioner(s) to approach this Court, in case of
any difficulty.

Direct
service for respondent No.3 is permitted.

(Smt.Abhilasha Kumari,J)

arg

   

Top