Disposed¶42

Mohit Agarwal v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Gauhati HC8 Apr 2025WP(C)/1297/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Refund of excess registration fees Rs. 7,63,950/-; lease deed No. 27535 registered 11.10.2022; excess collection attributed to ignorance of notification dated 03.09.2022; representation annexure 5 before Senior Sub-Registrar Kamrup (M); Gauhati High Court WP(C)/1297/2025 disposed of on 09.04.2025 by Arun Dev Choudhury, J., with direction to consider claim and complete process within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent No. 3 (Senior Sub-Registrar) to consider the petitioner's claim and do the needful within six weeks from furnishing a certified copy of the order passed that day. ¶42

Mohit Agarwal Vs the State of Assam and Ors. — Gauhati HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010047762025

2025:GAU-AS:4467

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

¶5

Case No. : WP(C)/1297/2025

¶6

MOHIT AGARWAL

¶7

S/O LATE MAHESH AGARWALLA, RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ, BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING, CHATRIBARI,KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶8

2: SMT PREMLATA AGARWAL

¶9

W/O LATE MAHESH AGARWALLA RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING

¶10

CHATRIBARI

¶11

KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶12

3: SMT ASHA AGARWAL W/O LATE KAILASH AGARWAL

¶13

RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING CHATRIBARI

¶14

KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶15

4: YAMAN AGARWAL S/O LATE KAILASH AGARWAL

¶16

RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING CHATRIBARI

¶17

KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶18

5: SAHIL AGARWAL S/O LATE KAILASH AGARWAL

¶19

Page No.# 2/4

¶20

RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING CHATRIBARI KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶21

6: SMT SUMAN AGARWAL W/O LATE BIMAL AGARWAL RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING CHATRIBARI KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 781001

¶22

7: DHRUV AGARWAL S/O LATE BIMAL AGARWAL RESIDENT OF GOVINDKUNJ BEHIND NARBADA BUILDING CHATRIBARI KAMRUP M ASSAM GUWAHATI 78100

¶23

VERSUS

¶24

THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ORS

¶25

REPBY THE COMMISSIONER AND SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF ASSAM, REVENUE AND DM DEPT, GUWAHATI, ASSAM

¶26

2:THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR

¶27

O/O THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

¶28

LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI

¶29

GUWAHATI 781036 KAMRUP M

¶30

3:THE SENIOR SUB REGISTRAR LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI

¶31

GUWAHATI 781036 KAMRUP M

¶32

4:THE TREASURY OFFICER O/O THE DISTRICT COMMISSIONER

¶33

LICHUBAGAN HENGRABARI GUWAHATI 781036 KAMRUP

¶34

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. D SARAF, MR. S S GUPTA

¶35

Advocate for the Respondent : SC, REVENUE AND DISASTER MANAGEMENT DEPT, GA,

¶36

Page No.# 3/4

¶37

ASSAM

¶38

BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY O R D E R

¶39

09.04.2025

¶40

Heard Mr. D Saraf, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S Baruah, learned Junior Government Advocate and Mr. PR Mahanta, learned standing counsel for the Revenue and Disaster Management Department. 2. The petitioner has approached this court alleging inaction on the part of the respondent authorities in refunding excess registration fees of Rs. 7,63,950/-. The petitioner has stated that a lease deed vide deed No. 27535 was registered on 11.10.2022 at the office of the respondent No. 3 and while registering the sale deed, registration fees was collected in excess for ignorance of notification dated 03.09.2022. According to the petitioner, the petitioner is entitled to get refund an amount of Rs. 7,63,950/- collected in excess at the time of registration of the sale deed.

¶41

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that they have preferred a representation (annexure 5) before the Senior Sub-Registrar, Kamrup (M) and it is her prayer that such application shall be considered by the Senior Sub-Registrar, Kamrup (M) and a direction may be issued to complete the process within a period of six weeks.

¶42

Ms. S Baruah, learned counsel submits that as per her instruction the Senior Sub-Registrar has already initiated the process and if the writ petition is disposed of as prayed by the petitioner, she has no objection. 5. Accordingly, considering the limited prayer, this writ petition stands disposed of asking the respondent No. 3 i.e. Senior Sub-Registrar to consider the claim of the petitioner and do the needful within a period of six weeks from furnishing a certified

¶43

Page No.# 4/4

¶44

copy of this order passed today by the petitioner.

¶45

JUDGE

¶46

Comparing Assistant

Mohit Agarwal v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Agarwal v. the State of Assam and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sunmai Phukan and Anr. Vs the State of Assam and 4 Ors.

Mujahar Ali Sarkar Vs the State of Assam and 5 Ors.

The Union of India and 2 Ors. Vs Natwar Kumar Jalan

On the Death of Smt Arpana Sarkar Her Legal Heir Noel Rongpi Vs the State of Assam and 5 Others

Smt. Urmila Agarwala Vs the Union of India and 6 Ors.

Smti Sati Kar Vs the State of Assam