LAWS(BOM)-2006-6-79

ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO LTD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On June 07, 2006
ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners herein are challenging the demand made by the respondents to pay stamp duty, on the policies as being covered under Article 47A(ii) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 namely as a policy of sea insurance.

(2.) A new facts may now be set out. Petitioner No. 1 had issued four insurance policies in favour of respondent No. 4-Mazgaon Dock Ltd. and two insurance policies in favour respondent No. 5-Oil and Natural Gas Commission for construction of rigs. Four of the policies were adjudicated and two were not adjudicated in terms of the return filed by the Superintendent of Stamps. Petitioner No. 1 is engaged in the business of general insurance and is a subsidiary of General Insurance Corporation of India, a wholly owned undertaking of the Government of India. Respondent No. 2 under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, hereinafter known as the Stamp Act, has certain statutory duties to perform. In the year 1985, the petitioners issued to Mazgaon Dock Ltd. and ONGC, builders risk policies. By letter of March 14, 1985, addressed to respondent No. 2 the petitioners sought adjudication of the stamps charges payable. By letter dated March 20, 1985, it was set out that the policy was a builders risk policy and the stamp charges applicable were 0.10 paise per Rs. 1,500 or part thereof, irrespective of the period of the insurance. Respondent No. 2 adjudicated the same in terms of Section 31 of the Stamp Act and the petitioners thereafter paid the stamp duty in terms of Section 32 of the Stamp Act. The stamp duty was paid as certified by respondent No. 2.

(3.) On May 6, 1987, the petitioners sent another policy, i. e. , marine hull policy for adjudication. The petitioners pointed out that the stamp duty payable on the policy was 10 paise for Rs. 1,500 on the sum assured. This policy was also adjudicated as per particulars contained in the petitioners letter dated May 6, 1987, and the stamp duty was accordingly paid as certified.