PRAJAY ENGINEERS SYNDICATE LIMITED REP BY ITS DIRECTOR MARKETING SUMIT SEN Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR AND COLLECTOR UNDER THE INDIAN STAMP ACT RANGA REDDY EAST REGISTRATION DISTRICT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner and three others presented a partition deed dated 25.01.2008 before the second respondent for registration. THE second respondent found that the stamp duty paid on the document was not adequate. THErefore, he referred the matter to the first respondent for determination. THE first respondent, in turn, issued a notice dated 05.10.2010, informing the petitioner that a sum of Rs.60,89,625/- is payable towards deficit stamp duty and Rs.5,85,775/- as shortfall of registration fee. On receipt of the said notice, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 23.07.2011, to the respondents stating that in case the respondents feel that the document cannot be registered, they would withdraw the document and cancel the transaction; and in that view of the matter, there is no necessity for registration at all.

(2.) The first respondent however issued proceedings dated 01.08.2011, in exercise of powers under Section 41-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short 'the Act'), requiring the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.60,89,625/- and Rs.5,85,775/-towards deficit stamp duty and registration fee respectively. THE petitioner challenges the said proceedings.

(3.) The petitioner presented a partition deed for registration. It is always open for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to determine the proper stamp duty and registration fee to be paid on such document. THE second respondent took the view that the document is not properly stamped and accordingly referred the matter to the first respondent, obviously under Section 47-A of the Act.