DEOCHAND BHURA Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is made to an order dated 24.07.2012 passed by the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division exercising powers of an Appellate Authority as contemplated under Section 56 (A) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as applicable in the State of Madhya Pradesh in the matter of demanding stamp duty on an instrument which was impounded by the competent authority in a proceeding that was held before it under the M.P. Land Revenue Code for mutation.

(2.) Facts in brief which are necessary for disposal of the writ petition goes to show that one late Usha Hajarnavis executed a Vasiyatnama (will) on 18.07.2006 (Annexure P-1) by which the property in question consisting of a plot measuring 2880 Sqft. situated in Manmohan Nagar, Jabalpur was given in favour of petitioner. After death of Smt. Usha Hajarnavis it is said that the petitioner applied for mutation and sought for entry of his name in the land/revenues record. The Superintendent of Land Records before whom the application was filed held that the Vasiyatnama has not been duly proved and based on the same mutation cannot be ordered. He, therefore dismissed the application and returned the documents. However, thereafter a demand notice Annexure P-2 was issued by the Collector of Stamps demanding a sum of Rs. 12,28,879/- as stamp duty, payable on the document. Challenging the same petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court being Writ Petition No.3132/2008. The said writ petition was disposed of vide Annexure P-3 with a direction to the petitioner to file an appeal before the Commissioner. The petitioner preferred an appeal, but the Commissioner refused to entertain the appeal and returned the same vide order dated 04.11.2008 Annexure P-4. The petitioner thereafter approached the Board of Revenue and when the Board of Revenue also refused to entertain the appeal (Annexure P-5) dated 06.10.2010, the second writ petition being Writ Petition No.10925/2011 was filed before this Court. This writ petition was disposed of vide order Annexure P-6 dated 12.08.2011 directing the Commissioner, Jabalpur Division to decide the matter. The Commissioner having decided the matter and having rejected the same vide order Annexure P-7 dated 24.07.2012, petitioner is before this Court challenging the order Annexure P-7 passed by the Commissioner and demand notice as indicated hereinabove.

(3.) Petitioner, who appears in person, submitted that the Collector of Stamp on the basis of unattested photocopy of Vasiyatnama has passed the impugned order. It is stated that in the absence of original documents being available all proceedings are null and void. Thereafter placing reliance on a judgment rendered by a Division Benchy of this Court in the case of Shiv Kumar Saxena Vs. Manish Chand, 2004 2 MPJR 269, the petitioner argued that the Commissioner after considering the collateral circumstances, such as payment of consideration for a plot purchased in the name of petitioner's wife one Smt. Vijay Laxmi Bhura, decided the appeal.