PANTALOON RETAIL Vs. CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEARNED Standing fairly stated that the issue raised in this case is a pure question of law which has to be determined by construction of agreement, Annexure 1 to the writ petition, so as to find out whether it results in grant of a "Lease" in the garb of a "Memorandum of Licence" or, in fact, it is a "Licence" only and, therefore, the writ petition may be heard finally at this very stage under the Rules of the Court, as he does not propose to file any counter affidavit but would address this Court from the documents available on record as also the statutory provisions and various authorities on the subject. In these circumstances, I proceed to hear this matter at length so as to decide finally at this stage under the Rules of the Court.

(2.) HEARD Sri Abhishek Kumar, learned counsel for petitioner, and, learned Standing Counsel for respondents.

(3.) IT is said that New Okhala Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "NOIDA") executed a lease -deed in favour of International Recreation Parks (P) Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "Original Lessee") for a term of 90 years. The Original Lessee executed an agreement treating it to be an "Agreement to License" with the petitioners on 12.3.2007 in respect whereto respondent no. 2 taken the view that there is an evasion of stamp duty since instrument in question executed between the petitioner and Original Lessee is an instrument of "Lease" and, therefore, ought to have been stamped accordingly, but that has not been done. He consequently issued notice dated 2.9.2008 to petitioner mentioning its address as under: M/s Pantaloon Retail India Ltd. 328A Plot No. A -2 Sector 38A NOIDA