CHAND KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 204 and 235 of 2007, as common questions of law and facts are involved in both these petitions. The facts are being referred from CWP No. 204 of 2007.

(2.) THE petitioners have prayed for quashing of order dated 28-8-2006 (Annexure P- 7), passed by the Tehsildar, Pehowa, exercising the powers of Registrar, under the registration Act, 1908 and Indian Stamp act, 1899 (for brevity 'the Act' ). The petitioners are transferees of property by virtue of a release deed dated 12-6-2000 (Annexure P- 5 ). An audit objection is said to have been raised and it was noted that there was deficiency in payment of stamp duty amounting to Rs. 6,43,750/-which became recoverable. On the basis of the aforementioned audit objection, respondent No. 4 Tehsildar, pehowa, exercising the powers of Registrar, issued a notice to the petitioners on 28-8-2006, calling upon them to deposit aforesaid deficient amount within a period of 15 days, failing which it was to be recovered as arrears of land revenue.

(3.) IN the written statement filed by respondent Nos. 1 to 4, the principal stand taken is that the present petition is not maintainable, as the remedy of appeal provided under Section 47-A of the Indian stamp Act has not been availed of by the petitioners and as such, they be relegated to the remedy of said appeal. It has also been pointed out that a letter dated 14-9-2001 was addressed to the petitioners, after the audit party had issued directions, but the aforementioned communication was received by one Ram Phal son of Jagat Ram, a close relative of the petitioners. The release deed was not supported by any document to prove that the property was ancestral in character. Eventually, impugned order dated 28-8-2006 (Annexure P-7) has been passed by respondent No. 2, calling upon the petitioners to pay the deficient stamp duty amounting to Rs. 6,43,750/ -.