WPMS/29/2011
2021 Latest Caselaw 1499 UK

               Office Notes, reports,
SL.           orders or proceedings or
      Date                                              COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
No           directions and Registrar's
               order with Signatures


                                          WPMS No. 29 of 2011
                                          Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. Sarvesh Agarwal, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. I.P. Kohli, Standing Counsel, for the State.

The present writ petition, the petitioner has given a challenge to the impugned order, which has been passed by the learned Additional District Magistrate (Stamp), Nainital, in a Stamp Case No. 52/72 of 2006-07, whereby, vide its judgement dated 21.10.2009, default in stamp duty, has been imposed upon the petitioner in relation to the trust deed, which is said to have been registered on 05.03.2003 before the Sub Registrar, Ramnagar, District Udham Singh Nagar, in the name of Shri Virendra Kumar Public Charitable Trust.

On a challenge being given to the said judgment of the learned Additional District Magistrate dated 21.10.2009, in Stamp Revision, under Section 56 of the Act, being Stamp Revision No. 3/45 of 2009-10, the said judgement has been affirmed and a liability of deficiency of stamp of Rs. 25,920/- has been held to be the validly assessed deficiency, as has been assessed by the Court below on the aforesaid trust deed dated 05.03.2003, as referred therein.

Brief genesis of the dispute, as pleaded by the petitioner in the writ petition is that the said trust deed, which was executed on 05.03.2003, in fact, was adequately stamped and, in fact, the initiation of the proceedings under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, in pursuance to the notice which was issued by virtue of the Letter No. 1313 of 2003, has been on the basis of an Audit Objection, which was raised by the order No. 297/M.N.N./2006-07 dated 26.10.2006, as it has and hence the cognizance has been taken, under Section 47A(4) of the Stamp Act as to be the basis of the proceedings.

When the notice was issued to the petitioner (Annexure 2 to the writ petition), the petitioner has filed his objection to the contents of the said notice, on 06.02.2009, contending thereof that the trust deed, which was executed therein on 05.03.2003, has been sufficiently stamped and as per the property, which was said to be the subject matter of the said trust deed, no deficiency as such was initially pointed out by the Sub Registrar, when the deed itself was executed in 2003, and was presented for its registration, and rather the initiation of the proceedings at the behest of an audit objection raised in 2009, it was at a highly belated stage of proceedings has been drawn against him, almost after more than 6½ years of execution of deed.

The Court of Additional District Magistrate, Nainital, by one of the impugned order dated 21.10.2009, which is impugned in the present writ petition has imposed a deficiency of Rs. 25,920/-, and if the reasoning which has been assigned therein is taken into consideration, in fact, it does not reflect that it was passed by him by way of an application of mind, rather it was nothing but a simplicitor narration of facts, which were subject matter of the pleadings, which were raised by the parties before the Court of Additional District Magistrate, Nainital. No reasoning, whatsoever has been assigned for assessing the deficiency as imposed.

Even otherwise also, the stand taken by the petitioner in his objection dated 06.02.2009, was not even referred or even considered by the learned Additional District Magistrate, for the purposes of determining the deficiency, as it has been assessed therein by the impugned order. The said subject matter, was put to challenge by the petitioner in a Stamp Revision, under Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act, and the Revisional Court of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority/Commissioner, Kumaon Division, by virtue of the impugned judgement which is under challenge i.e. dated 09.12.2010, had dismissed the revision and if the judgment itself, of the Revisional Court is taken into consideration, the Revisional Court has recorded, that the case of the petitioner, would not be falling within ambit of Section 58 of the Stamp Act, dealing with the class of properties given in it and hence the deficiency as determined by the Additional District Magistrate has been upheld.

If both the orders are taken into consideration, in fact, apart from the fact that it is a highly belated proceeding which was being drawn against the petitioner, exclusively on the basis of an Audit Objection, rather it was not an independent action which was taken by the respondents under Section 47A by the Stamp Authorities. Apart from it, both the judgments do not commensurate to be an adjudication of a liability, but it was rather nothing but an assertion of fact pleaded by parties only, without an application of mind.

Consequently, the impact of Section 58 of the Indian Stamp Act, which is even observed by the Revisional Court, to be not to be made applicable in the present case was without any sound basis and reasoning and hence the judgments of the Courts below cannot be sustained, they are hereby quashed and the writ petition would stand allowed accordingly.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 12.04.2021 Mahinder/