M/S RAMA LACE INDUSTRIES Vs. THE CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for the respondents 1 to 3 and learned Standing Counsel for the fourth respondent.

(2.) The petitioner entered into an agreement of sale with the fourth respondent for purchase of a shed in an extent of 10912 sq. meters for an amount of Rs. 15,96,163.00 for its industrial purpose on 08.0200 Stamp duty of Rs. 55,900.00 was paid at the time of agreement. Thereafter, the fourth respondent executed a sale deed on the same day and an amount of Rs. 40,000.00 was collected towards stamp duty. The petitioner claimed exemption from stamp duty of 50% by relying on G.O.Ms. No. 103, Revenue Department, dated 07.02001, in view of the purchase being for industrial unit. In those circumstances, the documents were given pending registration No. P9/2002 on 09.03.2002 and the matter was referred to the District Registrar on 19.03.2002 itself. The District Registrar clarified on 14.05.2002 that the agreement of sale is not covered by G.O.Ms. No.103, dated 07.02001. On receipt of such communication, the petitioner was asked to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs. 55,855.00 and deficit registration fee of Rs. 7,585.00 on agreement of sale and registration fee of Rs. 3,845.00 on sale deed. The petitioner was asked to remit the said amount within seven days. Accordingly, the petitioner paid the said amount and the documents were registered. Thereafter, the petitioner filed an application before the first respondent under Sec. 45 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short 'the Act') claiming refund of excess amount collected by the second respondent on the documents submitted by him. The petitioner placed reliance on the self same G.O.Ms. No.103 dated 07.02001. The application of the petitioner was dismissed by the first respondent by order dated 17.01.2005. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition was filed.

(3.) The only point that arises for consideration in the present Writ Petition is whether the order passed by the first respondent dismissing the application of the petitioner as not maintainable under Sec. 45 of the Act is valid or not.