Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

WPCRL/1236/2018
2025 Latest Caselaw 55 UK

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 55 UK
Judgement Date : 2 May, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

WPCRL/1236/2018 on 2 May, 2025

              Office Notes,
             reports, orders
             or proceedings
SL.
      Date    or directions                   COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
             and Registrar's
               order with
               Signatures
                               MCRC No. 9235 of 2025 (Correction Application)
                               in
                               WPCRL No. 1236 of 2018
                               Hon'ble Alok Mahra, J.

Mr. Dushyant Mainali, Advocate, for the Petitioner.

2. Mr. S. S. Chauhan, learned Deputy Advocate General, assisted by Mr. Vikas Uniyal, Brief Holder, for the State.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed this Correction Application (MCRC No. 9235 of 2015) seeking modification of the judgment and orders dated 06.08.2018 and 09.07.2018, passed by learned Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, in WPCRL No. 1236 of 2018.

4. Case of the petitioner is that the deficit of stamp fee and penalty thereon has been directed to be recovered from the petitioner though he was not lessee.

5. As per Section 29(c) of the Indian Stamp Act, in the case of conveyance (including are-conveyance of mortgaged property) by the grantee; in the case of lease or agreement to lease-by the lessee or intended lessee.

6. The stamp duty in case of lease, is to be paid by the lessee, while passing the order sought to be modified, this Hon'ble Court inadvertently directed that the deficit of stamp duty paid by the applicant, though respondent no.3 was the lessee. During pendency of this Modification Application and order dated 05.03.2025 passed by the Board of Revenue, Uttarakhand in Stamp Revision No. 10 of 2023 has been filed by respondent no.3. By this order, learned Board of Revenue has dismissed he revision filed by respondent no.3 and upheld the order passed by the Collector, whereby the deficit stamp duty is to be recovered from the lessee i.e., respondent no.3.

7. In view of the above submissions, the judgment and orders dated 06.08.2018 and 09.07.2018 are modified and the operative portion of the above said judgment shall be read as under:

"The deficit of stamp fee and penalty thereon should be recovered from respondent no. 3 instead of petitioner."

In view of the above, the Modification Application stands disposed.

(Alok Mahra, J.) 02.05.2025

Kaushal

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter