Disposed

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Orissa HC20 Sept 2022WP(C)/19450/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court considered a writ petition challenging the levy of stamp duty on a leasecum-sale deed of a core house. Relying on a prior judgment, the Court directed the Inspector General of Registration to decide on the Petitioner's representation for a refund of differential stamp duty and ordered the return of any excess collected.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Inspector General of Registration to decide on the representation and refund excess stamp duty within four weeks.

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty Vs State of Odisha — Property and Title | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No. 19450 OF 2022

¶3

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty

¶4

…. Petitioner

¶5

Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nanda, Advocate

¶6

-versus-

¶7

State of Odisha and others

¶8

…. Opp. Parties Mr. Suvashish Pattnaik, Additional Government Advocate

¶9

CORAM:

¶10

JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA

ORDER

Order No.

20.09.2022

This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.

¶16

Grievance of the Petitioner in this writ petition is with regard to levy of stamp duty for registration of deed of leasecum-sale dated 22^nd July, 2021 (Annexure-2) in respect of core house, i.e., HIG-III, Phase-I, Pokhariput Housing Scheme, Pokhariput, Bhubaneswar.

¶17

Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that pursuant to advertisement floated by Bhubaneswar Development Authority (BDA), Petitioner applied for a core house on lease-cum-sale basis. Pursuant to an agreement entered into, the Petitioner was delivered with possession of the said core house in the year 2000. Since then, the Petitioner is residing therein by completing construction of the core house. After much persuasion, a deed of lease-cum sale was executed between BDA and Petitioner and the same was registered on 22^nd July, 2021. However, the registering authority has levied stamp duty on the said deed of registration as per the bench

¶18

Page 1 of 4

¶19

// 2 //

¶20

mark/market value of the property prevailing on the date of registration of the deed in question.

¶21

3.1 Being aggrieved, the Petitioner made a representation to the Inspector of General, Registration, Odisha, Cuttack (IGR) on 23^rd December, 2021 under Annexure-5 for consideration of levying Stamp Duty, as aforesaid, but no action has yet been taken on the same. In view of the above, the Petitioner finding no other alternative has filed this writ petition to issue direction to the Opposite Parties to refund differential stamp duty charged at the time of registration of the property. It is his submission that law is no more res integra on the issue, as this Court, vide order dated 31^st March, 2021, passed in W.P.(C) No.8942 of 2021, held as under:-

¶22

“It is keeping all the above in view, this Court finds that stamp duty involving the registration of instrument based on lease-cum-sale deed entered into the parties at a particular rate and particular time will be the value for the registration purpose. It is in the circumstance, this Court in disposal of the Writ Petition while reiterating the settled position of law through the above judgment directs the opposite party nos.1 and 2 in the event the instrument is placed for registration by this petitioner, the Registering Authority shall register the same on the face value of the lease-cum-sale deed involved herein by accepting the stamp duty on the value as indicated therein by completing the entire exercise within a period of seven days.

¶23

For number of cases coming to this Court on this aspect, the IGR of the State is directed to issue necessary communication to all the Registrars and SubRegistrars of the State to follow the above direction in future registration of this nature at least to avoid flowing of such cases to this Court.

¶24

Page 2 of 4

¶25

// 3 //

¶26

Free copy of this order be supplied to Mr.S.Ghosh, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State for communication to the IGR of the State.”

¶27

3.2 It is his submission that pursuant to the order passed by this Court, as quoted above, Board of Revenue, Odisha, Cuttack, vide its letter No.5921 dated 1^st December, 2021 (Annexure-4), issued instructions to the Sub-Registrar, Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar to levy stamp duty as per the bench mark value in respect of the core houses prevalent at the time of handing over possession. In spite of the same, the IGR has failed to consider the representation of the Petitioner and issue necessary directions for refund the differential stamp duty.

¶28

Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and that the issue involved in this writ petition has already been answered in W.P.(C) No. 8942 of 2021, which was disposed of on 31^st March, 2021 (Annexure-3) as well as letter dated 1^st December, 2021 of Board of Revenue (Annexure-4), this Court feels that no fruitful purpose will be served awaiting response from the Opposite Parties. As such, this Court is of the considered opinion that case of the Petitioner should be considered in the light of the said direction and instruction respectively.

¶29

In view of the above, this Court disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the IGR, Odisha, Cuttack-Opposite Party No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the Petitioner dated 23^rd December, 2021 under Annexure-5 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this

¶30

Page 3 of 4

¶31

// 4 //

¶32

order and the result thereof shall be communicated to the Petitioner forthwith. Excess stamp duty, if any, collected from the Petitioner at the time of registration of Lease-cum-Sale Deed dated 22^nd July, 2021, shall also be refunded to him within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶33

Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper application.

¶34

¶35

(K.R. Mohapatra)
Judge

¶36

Page 4 of 4

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushanta Kumar Mohanty v. State of Odisha

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

Shyamapada Das Vs Krushnapada Das

Saroj Dash Vs Giribala Dash

Smt.Rekha Sarangi Vs Collector,Balasore

Bibekananda Guru Vs Dhirendra Kumar Panda

Bijaya Swain Vs State of Odisha

Rudra Mohan Nayak Vs State of Odisha