Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SMT. HINA RAHMAN ADULT W/O KAMRAN RAHMAN versus STATE OF U.P. THRU' SECY. INSTITUTIONAL REVENUE AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Smt. Hina Rahman Adult W/O Kamran Rahman v. State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Institutional Revenue And Others - WRIT - C No. 42101 of 2006 [2006] RD-AH 13034 (4 August 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).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ALLAHABAD

Court No. 1

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 42101 of 2006

Smt. Hina Rahman ..............Petitioner

Versus

State of U.P. and others.....Respondents

Hon'ble Yatindra Singh, J.

Hon'ble Ran Vijai Singh, J.

M/s O.M. Hrim Real Estates executed the lease deed in favour of petitioner on  27.5.2006. Petitioner presented lease deed for registration on the same day before respondent no.3. No order is being passed by respondent no. 3. Hence, the present writ petition.

We have heard learned counsel for petitioner and standing counsel for respondents. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that:

1. The property in dispute lies in Cantonment, Kanpur and the sufficient stamp duty according to circle rate in Cantonment, Kanpur has been fixed.

2.The question whether the property lies in the Cantonment Board or in Civil Lines area has already been determined by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority by his order dated 20.12.2005 and such stamp duty cannot be calculated on the basis of Circle Rate as applicable in Civil Lines, Kanpur.

3. The petitioner is required to pay stamp duty at the rate of market value of the property calculated on the basis of Circle Rate applicable in Civil Lines, Kanpur.

It is not necessary to decide this question in this writ petition at this stage.

The respondent no. 3 has not passed any order thereupon. It is open to respondent no. 3 either to pass an order on the contention raised by petitioner at this stage under Section 47(1)(a) of Stamp Act and in  case, it is held that the lease deed is not properly stamped then the matter can be referred to the Collector under Section 47 (1) (d) of the Stamp Act. The respondent no. 3 may pass the appropriate order on the lease deed submitted by the petitioner. Petitioner  has also remedy by means of approaching the Collector under Section 31 of Stamp  Act.

With these observations, the writ petition is disposed of.

Dt. 4.8.2006

A.K.- 42101/06


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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 |

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