This single-judge order dismissed a writ petition challenging a notification imposing stamp duty on private land developers, distinguishing them from government agencies and finding no arbitrary discrimination.
The petition was dismissed in limine with no direction issued to the respondent-State Government.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
Date of decision: 4.11.2011
M/s H.P.Singh and others
..Petitioners
Versus
State of Punjab and others
..Respondents
Coram: Hon’ble the Acting Chief Justice Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Narain Raina
Present: Mr. H.N.S.Gill, Advocates for the petitioners.
Rajiv Narain Raina,J
2
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
7.3.2011 issued under the Punjab Stamp (Dealing of Under Valued Instruments) Rules, 1983 was challenged on the ground of discrimination, the matter was posted before this Bench following an order passed by the learned Single Judge on 31.10.2011 to be heard by an appropriate Bench as per roster and that is how the matter has come up for hearing before us.
“ 3-B. Notwithstanding anything contained in Rule 3-A,
the rate fixed for allotment at the fixed price or at the price accepted after public auction of an immovable property by the Government or a Public Sector Undertaking or a local body, shall be deemed to be the (collector’s rate as fixed under rule 3-A of such property, and the stamp duty shall be charged for registration of instrument of such property at the rate so fixed, at the time of execution of first conveyance deed of such property; provided the conveyance deed is got registered upon the 30th day of September, 2011, after making full amount of the said price, or within a period of one year from the date, the last installment of such price had fallen due as per the Schedule fixed for payment in respect of such property, as the case may be.” (Underlining for emphasis)
3
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
1 crore; Urban and Development Fund of 1.34 crores, Social Infrastructure Fund of `30,90,000/-, whereas Government/Public Sector Undertakings/Local Bodies are free from payment of such charges and stamp duty in their case would be charged only at the rate fixed at the time of execution of the first conveyance deed for such property provided that such conveyance deed is got registered up to 30.9.2010. It is then projected that Government agencies would offer plots at reserve prices and the petitioner who has spent substantial amounts to start his Mega Project would not be able to offer prices for its plots/flats at competitive rates as their properties would be inherently more expensive to the intending purchasers from private land developers like the petitioner and therefore, their projects might fail to take off due to availability of cheaper flats/plots.4
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
5
C.W.P. No.17784 of 2011
Counsel and find no substance in the prayers made and consequently, dismiss the petition in limine.
(M.M.KUMAR)
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
(RAJIV NARAIN RAINA) JUDGE
November 4,2011 nk
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the notification imposing stamp duty on private land developers constitutes unreasonable discrimination compared to Government/Public Sector undertakings.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to exemption from stamp duty under the amended Rule 3-B of the Punjab Stamp Rules, 1983.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
M/s H.P.Singh and others
State of Punjab
Rajiv Narain Raina
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court