Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details


High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation


Aslam v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secretary Finance & Revenue Deptt. & Ors - WRIT - C No. 16615 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 6611 (27 March 2006)


This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).


Court No. 10

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 16615 of 2006

Aslam Ali Vs. State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble A.K. Yog, J.

Hon'ble (Mrs.) Saroj Bala,J.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel, Sri Mahesh Singh Niranjan, Advocate.

Proceedings were initiated under Indian Stamp Act on complaint being made by one Vinod Kumar dated 16-11-2004/Annexure-1 to the petition. Impugned order of assessment is dated 17-12-2005/Annexure-2 to the writ petition. Perusal of the impugned order of assessment  dated 17-12-2005 (Annexure-2 to the petition) shows that notice was sought to be served on the brother and wife of the petitioner who read the notice and also got it read before refusing to accept the notice. Hence, notice was affixed at the western entrance of the premises. By reading the impugned order of assessment it is not clear as to in what manner notice was sought to be served. Name of wife and brother of the petitioner has not been given. Name of witnesses (in whose presence notice was served) is also not given.

In that view of the matter, the facts incorporated in the impugned order of assessment do not inspire confidence.

In that view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order of assessment dated 17-12-2005/Annexure-2 to the petition and also consequential recovery certificate dated 25-1-2006/Annexure-3 to the petition with direction to the concerned authority (under Stamp Act) to decide the matter afresh. For this purpose, petitioner is directed to file application along with certified copy of this order before the concerned competent authority, ADM (Finance & Revenue), Ghaziabad/ Respondent No. 4 within two weeks from today and if such an application is made, the said authority shall pass appropriate order after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. In case petitioner fails to produce certified copy of this order within the stipulated period, this order shall become inoperative.

We make it clear that recovery with  respect to the amount in question (subject matter of the present writ petition) shall be subject to any order which may be passed on the application of the petitioner.

It is made clear that if certified copy of this order is not filed (as stipulated above), the respondents are at liberty to enforce citation to recover deficient stamp duty under Indian Stamp Act on the basis of above referred citation.

Subject to the above directions, writ petition stands finally disposed of.

There shall be no order as to costs.




Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites


dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.