K B NAGENDRA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition, the petitioners have challenged the order dated. 4. 7. 2002 passed by the karnataka Appellate Tribunal by which the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the petitioners which was filed under Section 46-A (3) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 ('the Act' for short)and also the order dated. 20. 6. 2001 passed by respondent No. 3 namely the Deputy commissioner of Stamps and Registration, Tumkur District directing the petitioners to pay stamp duty and registration fee of Rs. 1,46,174/- in respect of the sale deed dated 13. 2. 1997 executed in their favour.

(2.) THE facts essential for disposal of this writ petition are as follows: the petitioners purchased a certain property as per the sale deed dated. 13. 2. 1997 produced as annexure-B. The said deed was presented for registration before the jurisdictional sub-Registrar. The Sub-Registrar impounded the said document Under Section 33 (1) of the Act on the ground that the instrument was not duly stamped. Accordingly, he sent it to the Deputy commissioner as provided under Sec. 37 (2) of the Act. The Deputy Commissioner examined the document and was of opinion that the document was not chargeable with duty as per government order dated 28. 9. 1994 and accordingly certified to the said effect in exercise of his power under section 39 (1) (a) of the Act as per his order dated 16. 4. 97 produced as Annexure 'c'. Subsequently, the staff of the Accountant General during the course of their inspection found that the document in question was not duly stamped. Following the said finding, the Deputy commissioner initiated a proceeding under Section 46a of the Act and ultimately by his order dated 20. 6. 2001 which is produced as Annexure 'f' directed the petitioners to pay Rs. 1,46,174/as duty on the aforesaid instrument of sale. Against the said order, the petitioners presented an appeal in Appeal No. 484/2001 under Section 46a (3) of the Act before the Karnataka Appellate tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the said appeal by its order dated 4. 7. 2002 produced as annexure 'h'. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid two orders, the petitioners have presented this writ petition.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties and perused the impugned orders.