WARASAT ALI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that in the year 1979, one Mashhoor Ahmad, who was a very rice and renowned person of the locality gifted a piece of land situated in town Mohammadi to the petitioner and on being gifted the aforesaid plot, the petitioner constructed his residential house. Petitioner also moved an application before the Municipal Board, Mohammadi for mutation, which was allowed and necessary tax was also deposited by the petitioner. The Collector stamp-opposite party no.2 issued a notice requiring the petitioner to show cause why the proceedings under Section 33/38/47-A of the Indian Stamps Act may be not be initiated to which petitioner filed a reply indicating therein that no instrument or deed of transfer was executed, thus there was no occasion to pay stamp duty. The petitioner also placed reliance on Section 122, 123 and 129 of Transfer of Property Act. It was also been asserted that the peice of land was given by an oral gift in accordance with law and for initiation of proceedings under the aforesaid Sections of Indian Stamp Act it is condition precedent that there must have been an instrument. Not only this, the oral gift was made in the year 1979 and as such the proceedings are beyond the prescribed period of limitation.

(2.) THE Sub Divisional Officer/Stamp Collector being not satisfied with the reply so tendered by the petitioner passed the impugned order and held that in order to avoid stamp duty, documents for registration has not been presented though the property has been purchased. Hence this writ petition.

(3.) IN Hafeeza Bibi vs. Shaikh Farid (dead); 2011(5) SCC 654, the Apex Court in paragraph 29 of the report held as under:-