Disposed

The State of Maharashtra (Notice to Be Served Upon Secretary, Ministry of Revenue and Anr. v. Chandrakant P. Nanekar

Bombay HC19 Mar 2014CAI/172/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this civil application seeking clarification on a State Government circular dated 6 December 2012 regarding stamp duty, the Bench observed that the circular did not align with the legal position in Prabha Laxman Ghate.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed; 8 weeks granted to the State Government to comply with prior directions.

The State of Maharashtra (Notice to Be Served Upon Secretary, Ministry of Revenue and Anr. Vs Chandrakant P. Nanekar — Bombay HC (2014) — LawSathi Research

cai172.13.sxw

CPM

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APLICATION NO. 172 OF 2013 IN

¶5

PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 54 OF 2011

¶6

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Applicants.. Vs. Chandrakant B. Nanekar ...Respondent. (Orig. Petitioner)

¶7

Shri N.P. Deshpande, AGP for the Applicants.

¶8

Shri S.S. Shah for the Respondent

¶9

CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.A. SAYED, JJ.

¶10

DATE : MARCH 19, 2014

¶11

P.C.

¶12

Heard learned AGP for the Applicants- State of Maharashtra.

¶13

The PIL filed by the Respondent was disposed of by judgment and order dated 1 March 2013. Reliance was placed in the PIL on the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate Vs.

¶14

The Sub-Registrar and Collector of Stamps, Pune & Another, AIR 2004

¶15

Bom 267 . The Division Bench relied upon paragraph 4 of the said decision. After relying upon the said decision, in paragraph 2, the Division Bench

1/4

cai172.13.sxw

observed thus:

“(2) The Learned AGP, in all fairness, submits that the said decision is still holding the field and therefore, the Department cannot take any other view than the one expounded by this Court, in the fact situation similar to the decided case. He further submits that the Inspector General of Stamps will issue appropriate circular to all concerned to follow the legal position expounded by this Court in the abovesaid case. That circular be issued within two weeks from today.”

¶21

The prayer in this Application is based on clarification/Circular issued by the State Government dated 6 December 2012 (Exh.B to the Civil Application). The prayer in the said Application is that it may be clarified that the said Circular is in tune with the judgment of this Court in the case of

¶22

Prabha Laxman Ghate .

¶23

On a plain reading of the judgment and order dated 1 March 2013, we find that the Division Bench was of the view that so long as the decision in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate holds the field, the State Government is bound by the same and, therefore, in the fact situation which is similar to the fact situation in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate, the decision of this Court will apply. All that this Court has directed is that the Inspector General of Stamps should issue appropriate circular to all concerned to follow the binding decision of this Court. Though in paragraph 2 of the judgment and order, the statement of learned AGP is recorded, it is obvious that the

¶24

2/4

¶25

3 cai172.13.sxw

¶26

Division Bench was of the view that so long as the decision in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate stands, the State Government is bound by the same. The Division Bench was of the view that for the convenience of the members of the public, the Inspector General of Stamps should issue appropriate circular in terms of the law laid down by this Court in the said judgment.

¶27

On perusal of the Circular dated 6 December 2012, we find that the same is not in conformity with the law laid down by this Court in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate . We must note here that even the statement of the learned AGP which is recorded by this Court is that the Department cannot take any other view than the one expounded by this Court in the fact situation which is similar to the fact situation in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate. It is not a concession, but it is a statement of legal position existing on that day. The circular which this Court expected the State Government to issue a circular which will apply to cases in which the fact situation is similar in the fact situation in the case of Prabha Laxman Ghate.

¶28

Hence, subject to what is observed above, the Civil Application cannot be entertained. We accordingly dispose of the Civil Application. However, we grant time of 8 weeks to the State Government to comply with

3/4

cai172.13.sxw

the directions issued by this Court.

¶33

(A.S.OKA, J.)

¶34

( A.A. SAYED, J. )

¶35

4/4

The State of Maharashtra (Notice to Be Served Upon Secretary, Ministry of Revenue and Anr. v. Chandrakant P. Nanekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra (Notice to Be Served Upon Secretary, Ministry of Revenue and Anr. v. Chandrakant P. Nanekar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr. Ramesh Pandurang Kute and Ors. Vs Mrs. Jayashree Suresh Dange

Mrunali Virendra Lonare Vs Commissioner of Police and Ors.

Lt. Col. v. M. Karve Vs State of Maharashtra through Revenue and Forests Dept. and Ors.

Shri. Salim Mohammed Shaikh, through Power of Attorney, Shri. Wasim Ebrahim Sayyad Vs the Collector of Satara and Ors.

Sister Tehzeeb Q. Sayyad Vs State of Mahaashtra and Ors.

Rajan Bhalchandra Datar Vs the Saraswat Co-Operative Bank Limited