CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION Vs. J PRAKASH S/O GOPALAKRISHNA NELLI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are filed by the appellant assailing the correctness of the order dated 22.9.2010 passed in W.P. Nos.10198-10204/2010 wherein respondent Nos.1 to 10 herein had questioned the correctness of the order dated 2.2.2010 passed in S.A.P. No.8/2009-10 by the appellant herein. W.P. Nos.10198-10204/2010 filed by respondent Nos.1 to 10 were allowed and the order of the appellant herein was quashed. Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant herein felt necessitated to file the present appeals.

(2.) The grievance of the respondent Nos.1 to 10 herein is that they are the purchasers of certain flats of Sankey Apartments from the builder M/s. Land Develoment Corporation in the year 1985-1986. Respondent No.11 herein is the owner of the suit schedule land. It seems that there was an agreement between respondent No.11 and the builder for developing the land to construct the flats. The flats were constructed under the name and style of Sankey Apartments. Respondent Nos.1 to 10 purchased the flats from out of the share of the builder. After construction of the flats and after handing over the flats in favour of respondent Nos.1 to 10, it seems dispute started between builder and respondent No.11 herein. Respondent No.11 is unheard thereafter. However, respondent Nos.1 to 10 continued to occupy and live in the flats handed over to them by the builder, but no sale deed was executed by the builder in their favour. Ultimately, a dispute had arisen between respondent Nos.1 to 10 and respondent No.11 and the said dispute was adjudicated before the sole arbitrator. The sole arbitrator passed an award dated 27.6.2004. Thus, the dispute between respondent Nos.1 to 10 and respondent No.11 was resolved. When things stood thus, respondent Nos.1 to 10 wanted to register the award as well as the flats. Therefore, they approached the District Registrar, Gandhi Nagar, Bangalore, respondent No.12 herein, under Section 31. of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (for short the Act ) for adjudication relating to the payment of stamp duty and registration charges. Respondent No.12 passed an order dated 17.7.2004 valuing each of nine flats and ultimately, he has concluded that the market value of nine flats totally works out to Rs.1,36,54,814/-. He has also declared that a sum of Rs.68,275/- towards stamp duty has to be paid by respondent Nos.1 to 10.

(3.) It is the case of the respondent Nos.1 to 10 herein that they have paid the said amount and the award was registered. Be that as it may. The appellant herein initiated proceedings under Section 53(1) of the Act by issuing a notice at Annexure-G dated 29.10.2009. After receipt of the said notice, respondent Nos.1 to 10 filed detailed objections as per Annexure-H produced along with Writ petitions. Thereafter, the order has been passed by the appellant as per Annexure-A dated 2.2.2010 to the Writ Petition holding that the order of respondent No.12 is bad in law. The appellant remanded the matter to respondent No.12 with a direction to reconsider the same in accordance with law. The writ petitions filed by respondent Nos.1 to 10 came up for consideration before the learned Single judge on 22.9.2010. The learned Single Judge after hearing the appellant herein and the respondents 1 to 12 has allowed the writ petitions and quashed the order passed by the appellant herein. Being dissatisfied with the order passed by the learned Single Judge, the appellant has presented these appeals seeking appropriate reliefs as stated supra.