M RAMACHANDRA Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT petition is by a person, who claims to have purchased certain properties under two sale deeds dated 30.3.2001 executed by the Krishnarajapuram Rural House Building Co-operative Society Ltd., Krishnarajapuram, Bangalore East Taluk.

(2.) IT is the version of the petitioner that the petitioner is a member of the Society and the sale deeds have been executed pursuant to allotment of two sites/lands in favour of the petitioner. The sale deeds it appears had been presented for registration before the 2nd respondent - The Sub Registrar, K.R. Puram, Bangalore, on 2.4.2001. Though the registration procedure was over it appears it was immediately followed by a notice issued by the 1st respondent - the Deputy Commissioner and Deputy Registrar (DUS), under the provisions of Section 45-A of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') inter alia indicating that the valuation as had been disclosed in the instrument was not proper, that stamp duty paid on the instrument was deficient and difference was sought to be recovered etc.

(3.) SUBMISSION of Sri. Vijayashankar, learned Sr. Counsel appearing for the petitioner is that by drawing attention to the provisions of Article 20 and Schedule I of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, is that the situation is governed by the proviso to Article 20 which was in vogue from 1.4.1994 to 1.4.2001; that the instrument having been executed as on 30.3.2001 the situation was one still governed under the proviso; that an amendment to the provisions which has come into effect on and after 1.4.2001 which is one of deleting the proviso cannot have any bearing on the transaction or the amount of duty payable on the instrument and therefore the Deputy Commissioner was wrong in concluding that the petitioner was required to pay stamp duty on the market value of the property in question.