Allowed

State of Chhattisgarh v. Albert Edward Damram and Ors.

Chhattisgarh HC14 Nov 2017WP227/4178/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows three identical writ petitions by remanding the matter to the Collector of Stamps for a fresh inquiry with a complete opportunity of hearing, following the precedent of State of Chhattisgarh vs. Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders of Board of Revenue and Collector of Stamps set aside; matter remanded to Collector for fresh inquiry; parties to appear on 27.11.2017.

State of Chhattisgarh Vs Albert Edward Damram and Ors. — Land Acquisition | Chhattisgarh HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

NAFR

¶3

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

¶4

WP (227) No.2692 of 2009

¶5

State of Chhattisgarh through Collector, Bilaspur (CG).

¶6

Sub Registrar Bilaspur, Office of Registration, Bilaspur.

¶7

---- Petitioners

¶8

Versus

¶9

Anil Mundada, S/o Shri Vishnugopal Mundada, R/o near Gujrati Samaj, Tikrapara, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (CG).

¶10

Dr. Dwarika Prasad, S/o Shri Gajnand Agrawal (Seller), R/o Rishi Colony, Bilaspur.

¶11

---- Respondents

¶12

AND

¶13

WP (227) No.4124 of 2008

¶14

State of Chhattisgarh, through Sub Registrar, Bilaspur.

¶15

---- Petitioner

¶16

Versus

¶17

Manjit Singh Gumber, S/o Shri Govind Singh Gumber, Resident of Dayalband, Bilaspur, Tahsil and District Bilaspur (CG).

¶18

Smt. Margaret Kesani, Wd/o late A. Kesani, Unit 6, Buchanan, Saint, Josef Village 21, Elis Street, Abram, 2144, NSW, Australia.

¶19

Smt. Derias Stuart, Wd/o late Shri Marishius Stuart, R/o 8 Melina Circuit K. Rema, 6831 Weth Western, Australia.

¶20

Smt. Elizabeth D Cruz, W/o Shri K.D Cruz, 20 Hembo Road, Statutham Londan S.W. 166, J.E. United Kingdom.

¶21

Shri Kelmet Damerum R/o 11 Archalis Palace, Working Set, G.V.2 21452, S.L. United Kingdom.

¶22

Respondents No.2 & 5 through Power of Attorney Holder, Shri D.A.E. Damerum, S/o late Shri D.A. Damerum, R/o Krishna Apartment, Vidyanagar, Bilaspur (CG).

¶23

---- Respondents

¶24

AND

¶25

WP (227) No.4178 of 2008

¶26

State of Chhattisgarh, through the Collector of Stamps, Bilaspur.

¶27

---- Petitioner

¶28

Versus

¶29

Albert Edward Damram, S/o late C.A. Damram, R/o Krishna Apartment, Vidyanagar Tahsil and District Bilaspur (CG).

¶30

¶31

Smt. Margaret Kesani, Wd/o late A. Kesani, R/o Unit 6, Buchanan, Saint, Josef Village 21, Elis Street, Abram, 2144, NSW, Australia.

¶32

Smt. Derias Stuwart, Wd/o late Shri Maritias Stuwart, R/o 8 Melina Circuit K. Rema, 6831 Wath Western, Australia.

¶33

Smt. Elizabeth Decruz, W/o Shri K. Decruz, 20 Hembo Road, Statutham Londan S.W. 166, J.E. United Kingdom.

¶34

Shri Calmate Demarum, R/o 11 Archalis Palace, Working Set, G.V. 21452, United Kingdom.

¶35

Respondents No.2 & 5 through Shri Albert Edward Damram, S/o late Shri C.A. Damram, R/o Krishna Apartment, Vidyanagar, Bilaspur (CG).

¶36

---- Respondents

¶37

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For Petitioners/State : Mr. Shashank Thakur, Govt. Advocate For Respondents : Mr. Anand Shukla, Advocate

¶38

Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay K. Agrawal Order on Board

¶39

14/11/2017

¶40

The present writ petitions are similar and identical to that of the case of State of Chhattisgarh Vs. Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue, Bilaspur & Ors .¹ , whereby this Court has held as

¶41

under:-

¶42

“25. In the present case, the Sub-Registrar has referred the matters after considering the Guidelines and average market value of the lands. In the light of aforesaid judgments of the Supreme Court and the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, and the provisions of law, the Collector of Stamps was under obligation to enquire into the matter relating to undervaluation of the property for the purpose of stamps & registration, and was also under obligation to provide complete opportunity of hearing/adducing evidence to both the parties i.e. also to the State Government who may be the loser if proper stamp duty is not paid, and also provide opportunity to the parties before arriving at any

¶43

1 AIR 2012 Chhattisgarh 34

¶44

¶45

finding relating to a particular finding ignoring the finding that the builder/person has purchased the property for construction of building or colony.

¶46

For the foregoing reasons, in my considered view, the Collector of Stamps has not provided complete opportunity of hearing to the parties and has not enquired into the matter, and thereby committed illegality. By reversing/modifying the order passed by the Collector of Stamps, the Board of Revenue has also committed illegality.

¶47

The cases are remitted back to the Collector of Stamps who shall provide complete opportunity of hearing to the parties to adduce evidence and after holding enquiry under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act (Chhattisgarh Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1975 and the guidelines notified under the Chhattisgarh Preparation and Revision of Market Value Guidelines Rules, 2000, pass order afresh.”

¶48

In view of above, the writ petitions are allowed in terms of the order passed by this Court in Chhattisgarh Board of Revenue, Bilaspur (supra) and order passed by the Board of Revenue, Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur and order passed by the Collector of Stamps, Bilaspur are hereby set aside. Parties are directed to appear before the Collector of Stamps, Bilaspur on 27.11.2017 for hearing in accordance with law. However, the petitioners are at liberty to raise objection in accordance with law.

¶49

Sd/-

¶50

(Sanjay K Agrawal) Judge

¶51

L/-

State of Chhattisgarh v. Albert Edward Damram and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

State of Chhattisgarh v. Albert Edward Damram and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendrapal Singh Vs State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Mukesh Rathore Vs Kamli Bai @ Kammu and Ors.

Kanoi Paper and Industries Ltd. Vs C.S.E.B. and Ors.

Srijan Awasthi Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Smt. Punni Bai Vs State Of Chhattisgarh

Bhagirathi and Anr. Vs State Of Chhattisgarh