Dismissed

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd., v. the Collector (Stamps)

Rajasthan HC17 Dec 2021CW/19228/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Rajasthan High Court at Jodhpur dismissed a writ petition challenging an order rejecting an objection on jurisdiction. The Court held that immovable properties located in Rajasthan fall under its territory for imposing stamp duty, finding no cause for interference without adjudicating other merits.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition, stay petition, and all pending applications are dismissed.

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd., Vs the… — Property and Title | Rajasthan HC (2021)

¶1

(1 of 3)

¶2

[CW-19228/2018]

¶3

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR

¶4

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 19228/2018

¶5

Ansal Properties And Infrastructure Ltd., A Company Registered Under The Companies Act, 1956 Having Its Registered Office At 115 Ansal Bhawan, 16 Kasturba Gandhi Marg, New Delhi 11001 Through Its Authorized Person Sh. Anjal Bhootra S/o Sh. Prakash Ji Bhootra, Aged About 33 Years, Presently Working As Dy. Manager, Sales And Marketing, Ansal Royal Plaza - Authorized Signatory Ansal Properties And Infrastructure Ltd. Jodhpur.

¶6

----Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Collector (Stamps), Jodhpur. 2. The Sub-Registrar (First), Jodhpur.

¶9

----Respondents

¶10

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sachin Acharya For Respondent(s) : Ms. Akshiti Singhvi

¶11

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

¶12

Order

¶13

17/12/2021

¶14

The petitioner has preferred present petition for claiming the following relief:-

¶15

“I. The order dated 16.11.2018 (Annx.12) passed by the respondent No.1 rejecting the objection of the petitioner regarding reference may kindly be quashed and set aside;

¶16

II. Consequently the order dated 23.10.2017 (Annx.10) passed by the respondent No.1 in Stamp Case no.664/2017 may kindly be quashed and set aside;

¶17

III. The reference order dated 21.07.2017 (Annx.7) may kindly be quashed and set aside and the proceeding in the Stamp Case No.664/2017 pending before the Collector (Stamps), Jodhpur Division,

¶18

(2 of 3)

¶19

[CW-19228/2018]

¶20

Jodhpur may kindly be quashed and set aside being without jurisdiction;

¶21

IV. The respondents may be restrained from raising any demand with regards to the amalgamation that took place at New Delhi;” V. The basic objection dated 20.09.2013 (Annx.6) made by the respondent No.3 may kindly be quashed and set aside;”

¶22

The basic order under challenging is of 16.11.2018 whereby the learned authority has decided the issue of jurisdiction under the Rajasthan Stamp Act.

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ansal Township & Project Limited Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 was amalgamated into Ansal Properties & infrastructure Limited-present petitioner, which was confirmed by the order of Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 31.08.2016 in a Company petition bearing No.175/2006 while passing an order under Section 394 of the Companies Act.

¶24

Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the order of 16.11.2018 has rightly determined the issue of jurisdiction as the core jurisprudence regarding the immovable properties and the consequences is considered, the same is very clear under Sections 16, 17 & 18 of the CPC and thereafter, if it is conjointly read with the Rajasthan Stamp Act (3-B), the immovable properties which are situated in the Rajasthan, the jurisdiction for imposing the stamp duty shall be in Rajasthan.

¶25

Though the prayers of the petition are very wide, but the basic impugned order under challenge is of 16.11.2018 and rest of the merits of the case are yet to be adjudicated by the learned

¶26

(3 of 3)

¶27

[CW-19228/2018]

¶28

authority and therefore, without going into the merits of the issue, this Court deems it appropriate to adjudicate only the issue of jurisdiction which has been discussed in the order dated 16.11.2018, while leaving the merits and rest of the issues to be decided by the learned authority, strictly in accordance with law.

¶29

This Court is convinced that on reading of the basic law of Rajasthan Stamp Act (3-B) as well as the CPC (Section 16 CPC), the properties which are immovable properties for the purpose of imposition of stamp duty shall have jurisdiction in the territory of Rajasthan. Thus, no cause of interference in the present petition is made out.

¶30

Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed. Stay petition as well as all pending applications also stand dismissed.

¶31

(DR.PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI),J.

¶32

44-Sudheer/-

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd., v. the Collector (Stamps)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ansal Properties and Infrastructure Ltd., v. the Collector (Stamps)

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

M/S. Veer Teja Associates Vs State and Ors.

Dwarka Das Lakhotia Vs Shri Ram Lime Products Pvt. Ltd.

Smt.Amriti Devi and Anr. Vs State and Ors.

Ranjeet Singh Deora Vs Union of India

State of Rajasthan Vs Bhupesh Chandra Pareek

M/S. Shiv Stone Industries, Vs State and Ors.