NEERAJ AGGARWAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is for issuance of direction to respondent Nos. 2 to 4 for registration of sale deed dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -2), which the petitioner is entitled to be registered as per law.

(2.) A sale deed was executed between the petitioner and M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited on 10.05.2012. The stamp duty was already affixed and registration fee was deposited. However, the respondents have refused to registered the same.

(3.) M /s Radhika Fibre India Limited, through its director Manoj Aggarwal, has purchased property i.e. plot Nos. 90 and 91, measuring 604.99 sq. yards, situated at Green Park, Hisar, at the rate of Rs. 1,35,40,000/ - in open auction from Prafulla P. Vaidya, authorized person of M/s Indernational Assets Reconstruction Company Pvt. Ltd., Sector -27, Gurgaon. In the conveyance deed dated 08.12.2011 (Annexure P -1), it was mentioned that the above said property was mortgaged with the State Bank of India and was free from all encumbrances. After purchasing the property, requisite tax was deposited in the office of Municipal Corporation, Hisar, for the year 2010 -11. 'Chulla' tax was also paid by Mr. Manoj Aggarwal to the Municipal Corporation, Hisar. However, later on M/s Radhika Fibre Limited decided to sell the said property in favour of the petitioner for a sale consideration of Rs. 1,40,00,000/ -. Accordingly, a sale deed dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -2) was prepared. After making sale in favour of the petitioner, stamp duty worth Rs. 9,80,000/ - was deposited in State Bank of India. A receipt dated 10.05.2012, in this regard, is attached as Annexure P -3. Registration fee to the tune of Rs. 15,000/ - was also deposited vide challan form dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure P -4). However, on presentation of the said sale deed, it was not registered by the concerned authorities i.e. respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Thereafter, letter dated 17.05.2012 (Annexure P -5) was written to the Deputy Commissioner, Hisar. The petitioner also made an application dated 22.05.2012 (Annexure P -6) before the Public Grievances Commissioner, Government of Haryana, but no action has been taken thereon till date. On notice, reply has been filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4, stating that sale deed 10.05.2012, on presentation, was not registered as there was an attachment order of the Income Tax Department qua the said property. The Tax Recovery officer, vide letter dated 16.11.2006 (Annexure R -1) requested the Tehsildar, Hisar, not to transfer the said property. When the said sale deed was presented for registration, the Income Tax Department, vide letter dated 10.05.2012 (Annexure R -2), was asked, as to if they had any objection to the said registration. The Tax Recovery Officer, vide his letter dated 14.05.2012 (Annexure R -4), informed that huge amount of income tax is outstanding against Sh. P.R. Gupta, original owner of the said property and explanation qua the first sale deed registered, has been called for. It has been further stated that as per letter (Annexure R -4), registration of the property in question could not be done under the Provisions of the Income Tax Act. It is not disputed between the parties that the petitioner had purchased the property in question from M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited. M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited, on the other hand, had purchased this property in an open auction. Sh. P.R. Gupta was the original owner and he had mortgaged the said property with Punjab National Bank for taking the credit facility. The loanee defaulted in making the payment and therefore, by invoking the provisions of Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SAFFASI Act), the property was auctioned and M/S Radhika Fibre India Limited purchased the said property vide conveyance deed dated 08.12.2011 (Annexure P -1). At the time of purchasing the property, it was free from all encumbrances and charges. The auction purchaser had made a sale consideration of Rs. 1,35,40,000/ - to the auction seller. It is, thereafter, the petitioner purchased the said property from M/s Radhika Fibre India Limited for a sum of Rs. 1,40,00,000/ -. As regards the attachment of property by the Income Tax Department is concerned, Rule 68 -B of the Income Tax Rules is reproduced as under: