Writ petition filed for refund of stamp duty and registration fee. Court directed the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation regarding the refund within ten days.
Directed the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the representation for refund of stamp duty and registration fee within ten days.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND NINE
PRESENT
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM
WRIT PETITION NO : 12847 of 2009
Between:
T.R.Thyagarajan S/o.Late T.Rama Swamy R/o.H.No.8-2-401,Kummaraguda Secunderabad
..... PETITIONER
AND
1 Government of Andhra Pradesh, rep.by its Secretary REvenue (Registration-I) Secretariat, Hyderabad-4 2 The Dist.Registrar, Ranga Reddy District Moosapet, Hyderabad 3 The Sub Registrar, Serilingampally, Ranga Reddy District
.....RESPONDENT(S)
Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue a writ order or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus declaring the inaction of the respondents in not refunding the stamp duty to the petitoner when the document was not registeered and the cahllan not utilized as arbitrary,illegal, and unjust and consequently direct the second respondent to refund the stamp duty to the petitioner and pass
Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.C.M.R.VELU
Counsel for the Respondent No.: GP FOR REVENUE
The Court made the following :
WRIT PETITION No. 12847 of 2009
ORAL ORDER:
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for Revenue for the respondents.
The petitioner represented for refund of the stamp duty and registration fee of an amount of Rs.17,975/-, as the gift deed under Challan No. 709247 could not be registered.
On 21-3-2009, the petitioner submitted a written representation to the 2nd respondent seeking refund of the amount of Rs.17,795/-, since registration was refused on the ground that the property is a prohibited property for registration. The petitioner’s grievance is that the 2nd respondent has not yet disposed of the petitioner’s request for refund of the stamp duty and registration fee.
In the facts and circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the petitioner’s representation for refund of the stamp duty and registration fee, within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
The writ petition is disposed of as above at the stage of admission. No costs.
9th July, 2009. GRR
________________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should direct the 2nd respondent to pass orders on the petitioner's representation for refund of stamp duty and registration fee.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
T.R. Thyagarajan
Government of Andhra Pradesh
Dist. Registrar, Ranga Reddy District
Goda Raghuram
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
