Disposed

Ali Varish v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 5 Others

Allahabad HC29 May 2024WRIC/4829/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petition challenged an ex parte order under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act treating an irrevocable power of attorney as a conveyance, and a consequential attachment. The Court entertained the matter despite delay as it raised a pure question of law and stayed operation of both orders until further orders, with four weeks for counter affidavit.

What did the court decide?

Operation of order dated 25.10.2018 under Section 47-A and attachment order dated 20.9.2023 stayed until further orders; four weeks to file counter affidavit.

Ali Varish vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy… — Property and Title | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:40951

¶2

Court No. - 17

¶3

Case :- WRIT - C No. - 4829 of 2024 Petitioner :- Ali Varish Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko And 5 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Arjun Singh Kalhans Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned State Counsel for opposite parties no.1 to 5. Opposite party no.6 being merely proforma in nature, notice to opposite party no.6 is dispensed with.

¶6

Learned counsel for the petitioner is granted liberty to amend the prayer clause of the petition to correct the date of the impugned order from 25.10.2028 to 25.10.2018 during the course of the day.

¶7

Present petition has been filed challenging the order dated 25.10.2018 passed under Section 47 A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as well as consequential attachment order dated 20.9.2023.

¶8

Learned State Counsel at the very outset has submitted that the petition has been filed with considerable latches of about more than five years without any cogent explanation for same, however, since the issue involved is of pure question of law, this petition is being entertained on that score.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that proceedings under Section 47 A of the Act were instituted on the basis of spot inspection report dated 20.8.2018 upon registration of irrevocable power of attorney registered on 14.5.2018. It is submitted that the aforesaid irrevocable power of attorney had been executed by the petitioner's father- opposite party no.6 in favour of the petitioner authorizing him to conduct plotting and subsequent sale of the plots in question with the stipulation that sale consideration shall be paid by the petitioner to his father.

¶10

It is submitted that impugned order has been passed treating the aforesaid power of attorney to be a conveyance in terms of the Article 23 A of the Schedule 1- B of the Act of 1899 which has been wrongly interpreted since Article 23 pertains to conveyance of immovable property as defined under Section 2 (10) of the Act and is applicable only in case there is transfer of property while Article 23 (A) of Schedule 1 (B) pertains to conveyance in the nature of part performance in terms of Section 53 A of the Transfer of Property Act.

¶11

It is submitted that since there is no transfer of the plots in question in favour of the petitioner, the power of attorney would not come within the definition of either Article 23 or 23 (A) of Schedule 1 (B) of the Act of 1899.

¶12

The order itself indicates that it has been passed on an ex parte basis and in view of the aforesaid legal proposition, the application for interim relief is being considered despite the aforesaid latches.

¶13

Prima facie submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner have force and require consideration for which opposite parties are granted four weeks' time for filing counter affidavit.

¶14

List this case on 22.7.2024. Until further order of this Court operation of order dated 25.10.2018 passed under Section 47 A of the Act in Case No.01133/2018 and the consequential attachment order dated 20.9.2023 shall remain stayed.

¶15

Order Date :- 29.5.2024 mks

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MANISH SAXENA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ali Varish v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Varish v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Revenue Lko and 5 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd. Khalil Khan vs Smt. Naheed and 4 Others

Harsh Verma and Others vs Ramkali and Others

Shashank Gupta vs M/S Vatika Nirman Private Ltd. Lucknow Thru. Its Authorized Signatory

Raj Krishna Construction Company Pvt. Ltd. Thru. Authorized Signatory Jitendra Singh vs Presidency Infraheights Private Limited Thru. Authorized Signatory

Shashank Gupta vs M/S Vatika Nirman Private Ltd. Thru. Its Authorized Signatory

Shashank Gupta vs M/S Vatika Nirman Private Limited Thru. Authorized Signatory