Allowed

Apple a Day Properties Private Limited v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC11 Nov 2016WP(C)/13387/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a writ petition directing Sub Registrars to accept and register sale deeds executed before 01.04.2007 without demanding the higher stamp duty introduced by the Kerala Finance Act, 2007.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; respondents directed not to insist on stamp duty prevalent after 01.04.2007 for documents executed before that date.

Apple a Day Properties Private Limited Vs State of Kerala — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/20TH KARTHIKA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 13387 of 2007 (R)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

APPLE A DAY PROPERTIES PRIVATE LIMITED, APPLE TOWER, PALARIVATTOM, EDAPPALLY BYE-PASS ROAD, EDAPPALLY P.O., KOCHI-682 024, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY K.A.SAJU, MANAGING DIRECTOR.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.A.V.THOMAS,

¶9

SRI.JOJO GEORGE, SRI.NIDHI SAM JOHNS.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, TAXES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, KERALA, VANCHIYOOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 016.

¶14

4. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, THRIKKAKARA.

¶15

5. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, ALUVA.

¶16

6. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, SREEMOOLANAGARAM.

¶17

7. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, CHENGAMANAD.

¶18

WP(C).No. 13387 of 2007 (R)

¶19

8. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, TRIPUNITHURA.

¶20

9. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, EDAPPALLY.

¶21

10. THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRY OFFICE, ERNAKULAM.

¶22

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.SANTHOSH PETER.

¶23

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶24

rs.

¶25

WP(C).No. 13387 of 2007 (R)

¶26

APPENDIX

¶27

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:-

¶28

EXT.P1 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 24/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF SRI.K.D. GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR.

¶29

EXT.P2 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 24/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF JAYAMOLE MATHEW.

¶30

EXT.P3 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 30/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF T.S. VENUGOPAL.

¶31

EXT.P4 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 24/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF JOLSNA JOSEPH ABRAHAM.

¶32

EXT.P5 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 22/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF A.T. USMAN.

¶33

EXT.P6 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 30/03/2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF SAJAN JOSE PAINUMKAL AND DAISY SAJAN.

¶34

EXT.P7 COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 30/03/2007 EXECUTED BY P. SANJAY AND PARVATHY SANJAY.

¶35

EXT.P8 COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE KERALA FINANCE BILL 2007.

¶36

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.S. TO JUDGE

rs.

P.V.ASHA J.

--------------------------------------------

¶42

W.P.(C).No.13387 of 2007

¶43

---------------------------------------------

¶44

Dated this the 11^th day of November, 2016

¶45

J U D G M E N T

¶46

The petitioner filed this writ petition for a direction to the respondents 4 to 10-Sub Registrars of various sub Registry Offices in Ernakulam to receive and register Exts.P1 to P7 and similar instruments executed prior to 01/04/2007 relating to the petitioner without insisting on stamp duty in accordance with the Kerala Finance Act, 2007, which came into force with effect from 01.04.2007 and for a declaration that the documents executed prior to 1.04.2007, remitting the stamp duty, which prevailed as on 31.3.2007, are duly stamped.

¶47

Learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue is covered by a Division Bench judgment of this Court reported in State of Kerala v. George Jacob [2004 (4) KLT 709] in which an identical issue was considered with respect to the documents executed before 31.03.2005 and registered subsequent to 01.04.2005 and this Court held that the stamp duty which prevailed at the time of execution of the documents, alone need be remitted. In all those sale deeds executed prior to 31.03.2005, in stamp papers purchased before 31.03.2005, the stamp duty was remitted at the rates which prevailed before 31.03.2005.

¶48

W.P.(C).No.13387 of 2007

¶49

¶50

In this case, Exts.P1 to P7 documents were executed prior to 31.03.2007. It is the case of the petitioner that all these documents were executed in stamp papers purchased before 30.03.2007, though these documents were registered subsequent to 1.04.2007.

¶51

This Court had passed an interim order on 17.04.2007 directing the Registry officers-respondents 4 to 10 to receive Exts.P1 to P7 and to register the same subject to further orders of this Court without prejudice to the contentions of the respondents. The petitioner was directed to file an undertaking to return the documents for proceeding for realization of deficit stamp duty in the event of an adverse decision against them in the writ petition.

¶52

In the light of the judgment supra, the writ petition is liable to be allowed and the respondents will not be justified in insisting the stamp duty which prevailed subsequent to 01.04.2007.

¶53

The writ petition is allowed accordingly.

¶54

P.V.ASHA, JUDGE.

¶55

Apple a Day Properties Private Limited v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Apple a Day Properties Private Limited v. State of Kerala

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

Tas-Hil Cardemom (P) Limited Vs State of Kerala

A.K.Pradeep Vs the District Collector,Thrissur & Others

K.B.Krishnakumar Vs Village Office Kanayannoor.

Soumini P. Vs State of Kerala

P.P.Koya Vs the South Indian Bank Ltd.

Bharatheeya Ayurveda Parambarya Vs State of Kerala