GHANSHYAM DAS Vs. SUB-REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Complainant deposited stamp duty for registration of sale deed. Stamp duty was found deficient. He deposited duty penalty but still after registration of sale deed, the original sale deed has not been returned and the Bank is not granting loan to him on the duplicate issued by the Registration Department. The learned Forum held that it is not a consumer dispute. We are also of the view that this is not a consumer dispute. We are supported by the ruling S. P. Goel V/s. Collector of Stamps,1995 3 CPR 684 in which : "the Supreme Court has specifically considered the scope, object and purpose of the Registration Act, 1908 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 vis-a-vis the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 . The Court held that the Registration Act as also the Stamp Act are meant primarily to augment the State Revenue by prescribing the stamp duty on various categories of instruments or documents and the procedure for collection of stamp duty through distress or other means including criminal prosecution as non-payment of stamp duty has been constituted as an offence. Payment of registration fee or registration charges including charges for issuing certified copies of the registered document or fee for the inspection of various registers or documents kept in the Registrars or Sub-Registrars Office etc. constitute another component of State revenue. The Court observed thus : 'in this situation, therefore, the person who presents a document for registration and pays the stamp duty on it or the registration fee, does not become a consumer nor do the officers appointed to implement the provisions of the two Acts render any service within the meaning of Consumer Protection Act. They only perform their statutory duties (some of which as earlier indicated, are judicial or, at least quasi-judicial in nature) to raise and collect the State revenue which is a part of the sovereign power of the State'. "

(2.) If the appellant is aggrieved by any order of the ADM, he may file an appeal to the Commissioner under the Stamp Act. He has got efficacious remedy there. He may also file a civil suit if it is permissible to him. He may also get a certificate from the Collector that original has been lost and the duplicate may be treated as original one. In fact, when original has been lost, if duplicate has been issued to him under the provisions of Indian Evidence Act that may be read as primary evidence or primary document. However, this is not a consumer dispute and the appeal is to be dismissed on that ground. The complainant is at liberty to file a civil suit or approach the Commissioner for settling his grievances. ORDER the appeal is, hereby, dismissed. Cost of this appeal shall be easy.