SHAILESH HARILAL POONATAR Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR OF STAMPS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the present petition, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 27. 2. 2004 passed by the District Collector, Kolhapur, inter alia, directing the petitioner to make good the deficiency of stamp duty by properly classifying the release deed under Article 23 (b) (5) of schedule I to the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. Some of the material facts in the present case briefly stated are as under :-

(2.) MS. Kantaben Harilal Poonatar Mas the original purchaser of the property bearing Plot no. 50, City Survey No. 517-A/1, E Ward, Shivaji peth, Kolhapur and a bungalow built thereupon the said property which was. known as Poonam bungalow was acquired by the said deceased kantaben Harilal Poonatar on 1. 9. 1965 under a registered sale deed. On 17. 7. 1985, the said deceased Kantaben Poonatar executed a will conferring the right, title and interest in respect of the said property on the petitioner and the respondent no. 5. Smt. Kantaben Poonatar subsequently expired.

(3.) IN accordance with the said last deed and testament of Kantaben Poonatar dated 17/7/1985 the petitioners recorded their names in the record of rights including the property! register card on 5. 11. 1985. Thus, the petitioner and the respondent no. 3 became the co-owner in respect of the said property under the said last will and testament of the deceased. Sometime in or about february, 2004 an arrangement was arrived at between the respondent no. 3 and the petitioner under which the respondent no. 3 agreed to release his right, title and interest in favour of the petitioner herein. Consequently a deed of release was executed sometime on or about 10. 2. 2004. The said deed of release was executed and appropriate stamp duty as computed under Article 52 of schedule I of the Bombay Stamp Act was paid. The said release deed was thereafter forwarded for registration to the 2nd respondent. The said article 52 deals with the payment of stamp duty on the document described as release deed. The 2nd respondent however inter alia directed the petitioner to pay the stamp duty at the rate of 8% on the market value of the property as in the year 2004. The aforesaid order is passed on the basis that though the document is styled as 'release deed' but in fact the same is conveyance as it transfer the property in favour of another Downer. Thus the authorities held that the said document is liable to payment of stamp duty under art. 25 (B) () and not Article 52 of Schedule I to the Bombay Stamp Act.