Disposed

Chandrabhan v. State Finance Departmentors

Rajasthan HC26 Oct 2016CW/10975/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declined to interfere with attachment orders regarding land for recovery of unpaid stamp duty. The court directed the appellate authority to not dismiss the petitioner's appeal on grounds of delay but to decide it on merits.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition and stay application disposed of; direction to appellate authority to decide appeal on merits without rejecting for delay.

Chandrabhan Vs State Finance Departmentors — Money Laundering | Rajasthan HC (2016)

¶1

CW10975/2016

¶2

// 1 //

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶4

ORDER

¶5

IN S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.10975/2016 (With Stay Application No.9871/2016)

¶6

Chandrabhan S/o Shri Baldev Aheer, by caste Aheer, aged about, R/o Village Khanpur, Tehsil – Tijara, District Alwar (Rajasthan) ...petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

State of Rajasthan through its Principal Secretary, Department of Finance, Secretariat, Jaipur 2. The Inspector General, Stamps, Kar Bhawan, Ajmer

¶9

The Collector, Stamps, Alwar

¶10

The Sub Registrar, Bhiwadi, Stamps, Alwar

¶11

M/s Anees Projects Developers (I) Pvt. Ltd through CNH Bhasker Reddy Cite No.5, 30 Cross, 9, Main HRS Layout, Bangluru (Karnataka)

¶12

Date of Order ::: 26.10.2016

¶13

Present

¶14

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

¶15

Mr. Ravi Chirania, counsel for petitioner ####

¶16

By the Court :-

¶17

Petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging order dated 15.06.2015 (Annexure-4) and attachment order dated 06.07.2016 (Annexure-5) of his land. The order dated 15.06.2015 has been issued under the seal and signatures of the Collector – Stamps. Alwar.

¶18

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that a collaboration agreement was executed between the petitioner and respondent no.5 on 18.11.2013. The respondent no.5 has now gone back upon his promise and abandoned the process. The petitioner served a notice on him, but when respondent no.5 did not turn up, he cancelled the collaboration agreement. Thereafter the Sub Registrar, Bhiwadi, initiated proceedings under Section 51 of the Rajasthan Stamps Act against the respondent no.5 that the collaboration agreement

¶19

CW10975/2016

¶20

// 2 //

¶21

was liable to be levied stamp duty, since stamp duty was not paid and it was not registered, the land has been ordered to be attached for enforcing the recovery of stamp duty.

¶22

It is contended that as per the law, it is the buyer who is liable to make payment of stamp duty and not the seller. In the present case, the petitioner in any case cannot be held liable to make payment of the aforesaid amount as he has cancelled the collaboration agreement.

¶23

Having regard to the facts of the present case, this court is not inclined to interfere with the matter, however, it is left open to the petitioner to approach the appellate authority under law within Stamps and Registration Department itself by filing appeal against the order of the Collector – Stamps, Alwar, who shall examine all the aforesaid arguments and any other argument which the petitioner may raise, and decide the appeal in accordance with law.

¶24

At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner submits that the appeal may not be rejected on the ground of delay. In order to safeguard any such eventuality, this court directs the respondent appellate authority not to dismiss the appeal so filed on delay but decide the same on merits.

¶25

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of. This also disposes of stay application.

¶26

//Jaiman//72

Chandrabhan v. State Finance Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrabhan v. State Finance Departmentors

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sahab Ram Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Sunil Kumar Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

Cholamandalam Ms Gen Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Naraji and Others

Sundar Singh and Anr. Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp

State of Raj and Ors. Vs Dalla Ram and Anr.

Manoj @ Monu Vs State of Rajasthan through Pp