ATANU MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal has been preferred challenging an order dtd. 12/3/2019 passed in a writ petition being WP No. 2600 (W) of 2019.

(2.) Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts are that one Sujit Dutta along with one Subhajit Dutta mortgaged all that part and parcel of the property consisting of entire commercial land and building on Burdwan Kalna Road covering land area of 9.00 decimal and building area of 5689 square feet (hereinafter referred to as the said property) with the United Bank of India, Burdwan Branch (hereinafter referred to as the bank) for obtaining financial facility of Rs.40,38,106.00. As they subsequently failed to repay the loan, the bank took possession of the said property by invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the SARFAESI Act). The writ petitioner/appellant herein, namely, Atanu Mondal (in short, Atanu) participated in the auction conducted by the bank and emerged to be highest bidder. Upon payment of the bid amount of Rs.39,00,000.00, sale certificate was issued by the Authorised Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO) of the bank and possession of the property was handed over to Atanu, who thereafter applied for online query on 8/8/2018 being query no. 023-00011280728/2018 and in response thereto, the valuation of the said property was assessed to be Rs.1,71,19,140.00 and 6% of the valuation, i.e., Rs.10,27,158.00 was quantified to be the stamp duty. Atanu thereafter submitted several representations praying for cancellation of the impugned assessment done by the registering authority contending inter alia that stamp duty ought to have been quantified on the basis of the sale price indicated in the sale certificate but in vain and as such Atanu was constrained to prefer the writ application.

(3.) By the order impugned in the present appeal the writ petition was dismissed observing inter alia that following the judgment delivered in the case of Anil Kamal Singh vs. The State of West Bengal and Ors., reported in 2017(1) Cal LJ (Cal) 609, wherein it was held that the market price will be as determined by the registering authority, no interference is called for.