Orissa High Court
Debiprasad Satapathy vs State Of Odisha And Others on 8 August, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) NO. 17938 OF 2022
Debiprasad Satapathy .... Petitioner
Mr. Prasanta Kumar Nanda, Advocate
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opp. Parties
Mr. Dillip Kumar Mishra,
Additional Government Advocate
(For Opp. Party Nos.1 to 4)
CORAM:
JUSTICE K.R. MOHAPATRA
ORDER
Order No. 08.08.2022
2. 1. This matter is taken up through hybrid mode.
2. Grievance of the Petitioner in this writ petition is with
regard to levy of stamp duty for registration of deed of lease-
cum-sale dated 7th August, 2021 (Annexure-2) in respect of
core house, i.e., MIG-93, BDA Colony, Phase-I, Pokhariput,
Bhubaneswar.
3. Mr. Nanda, learned counsel for the Petitioner submits
that pursuant to advertisement floated by Bhubaneswar
Development Authority (BDA), Petitioner applied for a core
house on lease-cum-sale basis. Pursuant to an agreement
entered into, the Petitioner was delivered with possession of the
said core house in the year 1998. Since then, the Petitioner is
residing therein by completing construction of the core house.
After much persuasion, a deed of lease-cum sale was executed
between BDA and Petitioner and the same was registered on 7th
August, 2021. However, the registering authority has levied
stamp duty on the said deed of registration as per the bench
// 2 //
mark/market value of the property prevailing on the date of
registration of the deed in question.
3.1 Being aggrieved, the Petitioner made a representation to
the Inspector of General, Registration, Odisha, Cuttack (IGR)
dated 22nd December, 2021 under Annexure-5 for consideration
of levying Stamp Duty, as aforesaid, but no action has yet been
taken on the same. In view of the above, the Petitioner finding
no other alternative has filed this writ petition to issue direction
to the Opposite Parties to refund differential stamp duty
charged at the time of registration of the property. It is his
submission that law is no more res integra on the issue, as this
Court, vide order dated 31st March, 2021, passed in W.P.(C)
No.8942 of 2021, held as under:-
"It is keeping all the above in view, this Court finds
that stamp duty involving the registration of instrument
based on lease-cum-sale deed entered into the parties at a
particular rate and particular time will be the value for the
registration purpose. It is in the circumstance, this Court in
disposal of the Writ Petition while reiterating the settled
position of law through the above judgment directs the
opposite party ns.1 and 2 in the event the instrument is
placed for registration by this petitioner, the Registering
Authority shall register the same on the face value of the
lease-cum-sale deed involved herein by accepting the
stamp duty on the value as indicated therein by completing
the entire exercise within a period of seven days.
For number of cases coming to this Court on this
aspect, the IGR of the State is directed to issue necessary
communication to all the Registrars and Sub-Registrars of
the State to follow the above direction in future registration
of this nature at least to avoid flowing of such cases to this
Court.
Free copy of this order be supplied to Mr.S.Ghosh,
learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State for
communication to the IGR of the State."
// 3 //
3.2 It is his submission that pursuant to the order passed by
this Court, as quoted above, Board of Revenue, Odisha,
Cuttack, vide its letter No.5921 dated 1st December, 2021
(Annexure-4), issued instructions to the Sub-Registrar,
Khandagiri, Bhubaneswar to levy stamp duty as per the bench
mark value in respect of the core houses prevalent at the time of
handing over possession. In spite of the same, the IGR has
failed to consider the representation of the Petitioner and issue
necessary directions for refund the differential stamp duty.
4. Taking into consideration the submission made by
learned counsel for the Petitioner, this Court, vide order dated
26th July, 2022, directed learned State Counsel to take
instruction. Mr. Mishra, learned Additional Government
Advocate, however, prays for further time to take instruction in
the matter.
5. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of
the case and that the issue involved in this writ petition has
already been answered in W.P.(C) No. 8942 of 2021, which
was disposed of on 31st March, 2021 (Annexure-3) as well as
letter dated 1st December, 2021 of Board of Revenue
(Annexure-4), this Court feels that no fruitful purpose will be
served awaiting response from the Opposite Parties. As such,
this Court is of the considered opinion that case of the
Petitioner should be considered in the light of the said direction
and instruction respectively.
6. In view of the above, this Court disposes of the writ
petition with a direction to the IGR, Odisha, Cuttack-Opposite
// 4 //
Party No.2 to take a decision on the representation of the
Petitioner dated 22nd December, 2021 under Annexure-5 as
expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four
weeks from the date of production of certified copy of this
order and the result thereof shall be communicated to the
Petitioner forthwith. Excess stamp duty, if any, collected from
the Petitioner at the time of registration of Lease-cum-Sale
Deed dated 7th August, 2021, shall also be refunded to him
within a period of four weeks thereafter.
Urgent certified copy of this order be granted on proper
application.
(K.R. Mohapatra)
ms Judge
