Disposed

Alfa Mana Realtors Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. v. Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Sstampts,Pune and 2 Ors.

Bombay HC17 Dec 2019WP/3687/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner sought protection from coercive recovery of deficit stamp duty and penalty while an appeal remained pending. The Court accepted an undertaking from the respondent not to take coercive measures during the pendency of the appeal and disposed of the petition without examining merits.

What did the court decide?

Respondents undertook not to take coercive measures to recover stamp duty and penalty during the pendency of the appeal and revision.

Alfa Mana Realtors Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. Vs Inspector General… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Sherla V.

¶2

wpl.3557.2019_912 - corrected.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.

¶4

WRIT PETITION (L) NO.3557 OF 2019

¶5

Alfa Mana Realtors Pvt. Ltd. … Petitioner

¶6

Inspector General of Registration & Controller of Stamps, Pune, Maharashtra State … Respondents & Ors.

¶7

Ms.Mehek Bookwala-Shetty with A.A. Kavale i/b Zohair & Co. for the Petitioner Ms.Geeta R. Shastri, Additional Government Pleader, for Respondents

¶8

CORAM: S.C. DHARMADHIKARI & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

¶9

DATED: DECEMBER 17, 2019

¶10

The petition was filed because despite the filing of an appeal

¶11

by the petitioner, a demand was raised for payment of deficit

¶12

stamp duty and penalty.

¶13

The petition says in categorical terms that the petitioner filed an appeal under provisions of section 53A of Maharashtra Stamp

¶14

Act, 1958. The Appeal No.23 of 2014 is still pending. The

¶15

Note: This order is corrected in terms of speaking to the minutes of order dated 19.12.2019.

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

wpl.3557.2019_912 - corrected.doc

¶18

petitioner says that a follow-up was made and it was informed that the appeal would be taken up but the appeal was kept pending and in the meanwhile, Respondent No.2 served a demand notice, copy of which is at exhibit I to the petition. The petitioner, therefore, apprehends recovery of the deficit stamp duty and penalty by coercive means rendering the appeal infructuous.

¶19

On such a petition, we requested Ms.Shastri, appearing on behalf of the respondents, to take instructions. She has reverted back with the instructions that if the petitioner appears before respondent No.1 on 7.1.2020 and argues the appeal and revision, within a period of three months from that date, the final decision in that appeal and revision will be passed and duly communicated. In other words, after the petitioner appears and the hearing is concluded, within 3 months from the conclusion of the hearing, the respondent No.1 will pass the order in Appeal No.23 of 2014 and also in revision.

¶20

We accept this statement made by Ms.Shastri, on instructions, as an undertaking to this Court. The appeal and revision will now be decided in accordance with law and during its

¶21

Note: This order is corrected in terms of speaking to the minutes of order dated 19.12.2019.

¶22

Page 2 of 3

¶23

wpl.3557.2019_912 - corrected.doc

¶24

pendency, the respondents shall not take any coercive measures to recover the stamp duty and penalty.

¶25

5. With the above directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶26

We clarify that we have not examined the rival contentions on merits. They are kept open.

¶27

(R.I. CHAGLA, J.)

¶28

(S.C. DHARMADHIKARI, J.)

¶29

Digitally signed by Vishwanath Vishwanath S. Sherla S. Sherla Date: 2019.12.20 15:37:52 +0530

¶30

Note: This order is corrected in terms of speaking to the minutes of order dated 19.12.2019.

¶31

Page 3 of 3

Alfa Mana Realtors Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. v. Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Sstampts,Pune and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alfa Mana Realtors Pvt.Ltd. and Anr. v. Inspector General of Registration and Controller of Sstampts,Pune and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jan Adalat , a Centre for Paralegal Services and Legal Aid and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, Law and Judiciary and Ors.

Shrikant Devdas Naik and 3 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Kamlakar Motiram Satve and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Arvind D. Mahajan Vs State of Maharashtra and 4 Ors.

Kdelite Foods Ltd. and 4 Ors. Vs Bank of Baroda and 3 Ors.

M/S. Jagannath Auto Services through Partners Arun Kumar J Sathe Vs Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. Througgh Divisional Manager (Retail) Pune