SUMERMAL SURANA Vs. STATE OF W.B.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are before this Court seeking issuance of a writ of Certiorari, particularly in respect of demand letter dated 19th November, 2019, by which Additional Registrar of Assurance-III, Kolkata, has demanded deficit stamp duty and registration fees against registration of final decree dated 14th July, 2017, passed in EOS no.5 of 2014.

(2.) Mr. S. Banerjee, learned advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners submits, there was valuation made of the decree and stamp duty paid thereon. The demand for purported deficit stamp duty is bad and should be quashed. There should also be consequential direction for registering the decree at the value assessed for stamp duty already paid.

(3.) Mr. A. Banerjee, learned senior advocate, Senior Standing Counsel, appears on behalf of State and relies on section 23 in Registration Act, 1908 to submit, the document is being presented for registration at this time and, therefore, keeping aside the demand for deficit stamp duty, since stamp was assessed and paid, the assessment of registration fee should be 1% of current prevailing market rate of the property. Mr. S. Banerjee responds that once assessment has been made as on market value, there cannot be taken another value as market value for the purpose of registration.