STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. MAHAJAN SABHA GURDASPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Leave granted.

(2.) This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court dated August 10, 1994 made in C.R. No. 2836/94 dismissing the revision filed by the State on 5-2-1990. When the respondents had gone to the high Court by way of writ petition, it had given liberty to the respondents to file an appeal before the District Judge. The appeal was accordingly filed before the Additional District Judge at Gurdaspur. In C.A. No. 11/19 of 1991 by order dated March 21, 1991, the District Judge held that once the Sub-Registrar had registered the document, he became functus officio and, therefore, he has not power to make a reference to the Collector for collecting the deficit stamp duty and registration charges. When this was questioned, as stated earlier, the HIgh Court rejected the revision. Thus this appeal by special leave.

(3.) The facts would lie in short compass. The sale deed No. 3033 was executed in favour of the respondents for a consideration of Rs.2,50,000/- in respect of the building situated in Gurdaspur. Since it is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, no stamp duty was affixed on the sale deed. Equally, no registration charges were paid. When it was pointed out by the auditing authority, the Sub-Registrar had made a reference to the District Collector for collection of the stamp duty of Rs.32,350/- and also registration fee of Rs.1,000/-. On receipt of the reference, the Collector issued notice to the respondent who filed his objection on October 9, 1989 contending that since the document was registered two years prior to the issuance of the notice, the Collector ceased to have an power to take action calling upon the respondents to pay the stamp duty and the registration fee. As stated earlier, the Collector had rejected the contention and consequential orders were passed by the Additional District Judge and thereafter revision in the High Court ended in favour of the respondents.