Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Maganti Subrahmanya Chowdary, vs M/S Manjeera Constructions ... on 13 August, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH: AMARAVATI
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CHIEF JUSTICE
&
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NINALA JAYASURYA
I.A.NO.2 OF 2021 in/and W.A. No.49 of 2021
(Through video conferencing)
Maganti Subrahmanya Chowdary,
S/o M. Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged about 66 years,
Occ: Doctor, R/o Plot No.5-6, Door No.59-8-7,
Vasudha Apartments, Gayathri Nagar, Vijayawada.
... Appellant
Versus
M/s Manjeera Constructions Limited,
711, Manjeera Trinity Corporate,
JNTU Hitech City Road, Kukatpally,
Hyderabad 500 072, Represented by its
Managing Director G. Yoganand,
S/o Late G. Chennakesavulu,
Aged about 61 years, R/o Plot No.18,
Ashwini Heights, Road No.70, Jubilee Hills,
Hyderabad- 500 033, and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the Appellant : Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad
For Mr. M.R.K. Chakravarthy
Counsel for respondent No.1 : Mr. B. Narayana Reddy
Counsel for respondent Nos.2 to 4 : GP for Stamps & Registration
Counsel for respondent No.5 : Mr. S. Lakshminarayana Reddy
JUDGMENT (ORAL)
Dt:13.08.2021
(per Arup Kumar Goswami, CJ)
Heard Mr. G. Ramakrishna Prasad, learned counsel representing
Mr. M.R.K. Chakravarthy, learned counsel for the appellant. Also heard
2 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.49 of 2021
Mr. B. Narayana Reddy, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1,
learned Government Pleader for Stamps and Registration appearing for
respondent Nos.2 to 4 and Mr. S. Lakshminarayana Reddy, learned
counsel appearing for respondent No.5.
2. This writ appeal is preferred assailing the interim order dated
06.01.2021 passed by learned single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in
W.P.No.24859 of 2020.
3. The 1st respondent-writ petitioner filed I.A.No.2 of 2021 for
vacating the interim order passed by this Court on 03.02.2021, by which
the order under challenge was suspended by this Court on the ground
that, prima facie, the interim order passed by the learned single Judge is
in tune with the final relief prayed for by the writ petitioner.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
materials on record.
5. The writ petition was filed with the following relief:
"....to issue a Writ, order or direction, more
particularly one in the nature of a Writ of Mandamus,
declaring the action of the Respondent No.3 in refusing to
validate the impounded unregistered Supplementary
Agreement dated 13.11.2018, by collecting the deficit stamp
duty, by way of letter No. G2/377/2020, dated 14.09.2020,
as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14, 19 and 300 A
of the Constitution of India and consequently direct the
Respondent No.3 to validate the impounded document by
collecting the necessary stamp duty in accordance with the
3 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.49 of 2021
provisions of Indian Stamps Act 1899 and pass such other
order or orders as deem fit and proper in the circumstances
of the case."
6. The interim prayer made by the petitioner by filing I.A.No.1 of 2020
in the writ petition is as follows:
".. to suspend the letter, dated 14.09.2020 and also
direct the respondent No.3 herein to accept the
Supplementary Agreement dated 13.11.2018, for the
purposes of impounding and validation by collecting the
stamp duty payable on the document, pending disposal of
W.P.No.24859 of 2020 on the file of the High Court."
7. The order under challenge reads as follows:
"Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the 3rd
respondent is refused to validate the impugned unregistered
Supplementary Agreement dated 13.11.2018 by collecting
the deficit stamp duty vide letter No.G2/377/2020 dated
14.09.2020 is illegal, arbitrary.
The learned counsel for petitioner placed reliance on
the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2008(3)
ALD-P.56.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case and considering the submissions of the learned counsel
and following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court
reported in 2008(3) ALD-P.56, this court prima facie satisfied
that the petitioner has shown sufficient cause for grant of
interim prayer.
4 HCJ & NJS,J
W.A.No.49 of 2021
Accordingly, there shall be interim direction as prayed
for."
8. On perusal of the aforesaid order, we are of the opinion that the
interim order passed by the learned single Judge has resulted in
granting the final relief prayed for in the writ petition, and therefore, the
same cannot be sustained in law.
9. In that view of the matter, the order dated 06.01.2021 passed by
the learned single Judge in I.A.No.1 of 2020 in W.P.No.24859 of 2020 is
set aside.
10. Registry will list the writ petition before the learned single Judge
having roster on 06.09.2021. In the meantime, the parties may exchange
affidavit(s) in the writ petition.
11. Accordingly, the writ appeal is allowed with the aforesaid
directions. No costs. Resultantly, I.A.No.2 of 2021 and pending
miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, CJ NINALA JAYASURYA, J
Nn
