Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ramchand Pessumal Vatiano Since Decd. ... on 5 February, 2024
Author: Sunita Agarwal
Bench: Sunita Agarwal
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY) NO. 564 of
2024
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 114 of 2024
With
R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 114 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16112 of 2016
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2024
In R/LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO. 114 of 2024
In
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 16112 of 2016
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
RAMCHAND PESSUMAL VATIANO SINCE DECD. THROUGH LEGAL
HEIRS
==========================================================
Appearance:
MS. HETAL PATEL, AGP, for the Applicant(s) No. 1,2,3
for the Respondent(s) No. 1,1.1,1.2,1.3,1.4,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE
SUNITA AGARWAL
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE
Date : 05/02/2024
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MRS. JUSTICE SUNITA
AGARWAL)
Order in Civil Application (Condonation of Delay) No. 564
of 2024
The delay of 188 days occurred in filing the Letters Patent
Appeal is explained to the satisfaction of the Court. Hence,
delay is condoned. Present Civil Application is allowed. Registry
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
is directed to give pakka number to the Appeal.
Order in Letters Patent Appeal No. 114 of 2024
1. The instant Letters Patent Appeal is directed against
the judgment and order dated 21.06.2023 passed by the
learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition quashing the
orders dated 17.05.2012 and 22.05.2016 passed by the
Stamp Authorities invoking Article-44(3)(a) of the Gujarat
Stamp Act, 1958 to levy stamp duty on the dissolution deed of
partnership firm which was registered on 14.07.2009 on non-
judicial stamp paper of Rs. 100/- as per the prevailing law.
2. It seems that the proceedings were initiated on an
audit objection of an inspection team of Accountant General's
Office, wherein the dissolution deed was termed as short /
deficit of stamp duty. The recoveries were initiated against
the petitioner.
3. It is argued by the learned AGP Ms. Hetal Patel
appearing for the State - appellants that as per the
dissolution deed of partnership dated 14.07.2009, rights in
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
three immovable properties were distributed amongst two
partners, whereas third partner did not get any right in the
immovable property. The attention of the Court is invited to
the documents on record appended with the memo of appeal
to demonstrate that there were three partners of the
partnership firm namely M/s Kishanchand Laxmandas. The
description of the properties which were distributed amongst
two partners namely Ramchand Pesumal Vatiyani and
Sureshmal Pesumal Vatiyani are noted by learned Single
Judge in the paragraph no. 5.4 of the judgment impugned.
4. It is argued by the learned AGP Ms. Patel that since
the immovable properties of the partnership firm were
distributed only amongst two partners leaving the third one,
without distribution of any right or interest in the immovable
properties of the partnership firm, it would be treated as a
transfer of the rights in the property in favour of two
partners, and hence, the provisions of Article 44(3)(a) of the
Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 would be attracted. Further
reference has been made to the decision of this Court in the
case of Chief Controller Revenue Authority versus
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
Chaturbhuj and Bachubhai Tribhovandas Thakkar
reported in 1976(0) GLR 898, to assert that the facts
stated therein are different and, hence, reliance placed on the
said decision is a result of misapplication of the same.
5. To consider the submissions of learned AGP, we may
record that there is no dispute about the fact that the subject
properties were purchased by the partnership firm and they
were distributed amongst the partners of the firm at the time
of dissolution in terms and conditions of the dissolution deed
dated 14.07.2009.
6. It is not a case where the immovable properties
distributed amongst the partners of the firm, have been
brought by any other partner (third partner) as his share or
contribution to partnership and joint venture to run a
business and the property of one partner has been taken by
another partner as a result of dissolution of the partnership
firm. It is a case where the properties which were distributed
amongst the partners, were purchased by the partnership
firm and they were distributed as per the agreement between
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
the partners in the dissolution deed. As there is no transfer
of right in the property of one partner in favour of another by
way of dissolution deed, the provisions of Article 44(3)(a) will
not be attracted. The dissolution deed cannot be termed as a
partition deed as suggested by the respondents in order to
levy the stamp duty. The arguments in this regard have been
turned down by the learned Single Judge noticing the
arguments of learned AGP that the deficit stamp duty is to be
paid for execution of the documents by considering the deed
of dissolution as a deed of partition.
7. The learned Single Judge having read the provisions
of Article 44(3)(a) of the Gujarat Stamp Act, 1958 has rightly
formed an opinion that the said provision would not be
applicable, inasmuch as, it is not the case of the respondent
authorities that the immovable properties were taken in
dissolution of the partnership firm by a partner other than the
partners who brought the properties on his shares and/ or
contribution.
8. Having noted above, we do not find any good ground
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/CA/564/2024 ORDER DATED: 05/02/2024
undefined
to interfere. The present Letters Patent Appeal is dismissed
being devoid of merits. Civil Application for stay as well as
any other pending application(s), if any, shall also stand
disposed of.
(SUNITA AGARWAL, CJ )
(ANIRUDDHA P. MAYEE, J.)
AMAR SINGH
