COLLECTOR OF STAMPS Vs. HEMLATA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant, aggrieved by the order of the learned single Judge allowing civil Writ Petition No.687/ 96 and directing it re-assess the duty payable on the disclosed consideration of Rs.10,000.00 in the conveyance deed, has filed the present appeal. The appellant's case is that the admitted consideration in the entire transaction is Rs. 5,6 1,000.00 on which stamp duty is liable to be paid.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the present appeal may be noticed in brief:

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellant has argued before us that admittedly respondent No. 1 had purchased the flat for a disclosed consideration of Rs.5,51,000.00, which sum was reflected in the agreement to selI that had been sent alongwith the conveyance deed for adjudication of the stamp duty payable. It was argued that in terms of Section 27 of the Indian Stamp Act, the consideration and all other facts and circumstances affecting the chargeability of the instrument with duty, were required to be truly and fully set forth. Reliance was also placed on Section 28(3) of the Indian Stamp Act. The section caters to a situation where a purchaser of property 'having not obtained the conveyance deed contracts to sell the same to another person. In such an event, where the property is to be conveyed to the said purchaser, the conveyance is charged with ad valorem duty i.e. consideration for sale by the original purchaser to the subsequent purchaser. Learned counsel also argued that in the instant case, the Delhi Development Authority should not have recognised the agreement to sell, as being barred under Section 49 of the Stamp Act. Further, that the Delhi Development Authority was duty bound to impound the said document. The argument being that the Delhi Development Authority could not by the conveyance deed sent to respondent No. 1 permit the conversion of leasehold rights into freehold. Learned counsel for the appellant also argued that the authorities relied on by the learned Single Judge in holding that the Collector of Stamps cannot hold an enquiry into the actual consideration and has to go by the disclosed consideration were not applicable. It was urged that since the agreement to sell itself disclosed the consideration the same should have been adopted for the purpose of levy of stamp duty.