Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

M/S.Gold Earth Properties vs Inspector General Of ...

Madras High Court|28 August, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

The prayer in the Writ Petitions is for issuance of Writs of Certiorari, to call for the records in respect of the final notices, dated 10.2.2009 bearing Ref.No.16562/ABP/08 (in W.P.No.7546 of 2009) and Ref.No.16561/ABP/08 (in W.P.No.7547 of 2009) issued by the third respondent and quash the same.
2. The petitioner-Company has challenged the said notices dated 10.2.2009 issued by the third respondent-Joint-Sub-Registrar-I, District Registrar Office, Royapettah, Chennai-600 014, whereby and whereunder, he has been asked to pay additional stamp duty showing the deficit, giving reference to the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act.
3. According to the petitioner-Company, the Company has purchased the properties bearing Shop Nos.32 and 33 in the ground-floor of the multi-storied building, measuring 259 Sq.Ft. and 173 Sq.Ft. of the built area, inclusive of common area along with 0.59% and 0.40% of undivided shares of the land, measuring 21808.903 Sq.Ft. comprised in R.S.No.3/4 of Mylapore Village, bearing Door No.129 (Old No.47) at G.N.Chetty Road, Chennai-600 006, in the public auction conducted by the Punjab and Sind Bank, Asset Recovery Management Branch, under the provisions of SARFAESI Act, for a total sale consideration of Rs.9,88,000/- and Rs.7,14,000/- respectively, and the sale certificates were also issued in favour of the petitioner-Company, which are pending registration with the third respondent, for which the stamp duty of Rs.78,040/- and Rs.57,120/- were paid by the petitioner.
4. It is the further case of the petitioner-Company that the sale consideration amounts are paid to the Bank as mentioned in the sale certificates and it is specifically stated therein that a sum of Rs.5,50,00,000/- specified in the sale certificates relates to the credit facilities offered by the Punjab and Sind Bank, to M/s.Supreme Chemi Plast Pipings Private Limited, the debtor.
5. It is further stated that the credit facilities, namely Cash Credit (Hyp)-Rs.150 lakhs, Cash Credit (Book Debts)-Rs.100 lakhs, Letter of Credit (Inland)-Rs.200 lakhs and Bank Guarantee-Rs.100 lakhs, totally, Rs.5,50,00,000/-, has nothing to do with the sale consideration amount of Rs.9,88,000/- and Rs.7,14,000/- paid by the petitioner-Company in the auction-purchase. But the respondents have asked for higher amounts on the basis of the credit facilities as was given by the Bank in favour of the debtor.
6. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents-State submits that such demand had been made under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act, but it was accepted that the provision of law quoted in the impugned notices has no relevance to the present cases.
7. Inspite of time being allowed, the respondents have not filed any counter affidavit and failed to show as to how they can claim further stamp duty from the petitioner-Company on the basis of the credit facilities as was given by the Bank to the debtor.
8. It has not been disputed that the petitioner-Company paid only the sale consideration amounts of Rs.9,88,000/- and Rs.7,14,000/-, for the purchase of the properties in question in the auction-purchase under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, and the credit facilities offered by the Bank to the debtor has no relevance to the auction-purchase. The respondents are entitled to get the stamp duty only as per the sale consideration amounts. This Court holds that the credit facilities as was given by the Bank in favour of the debtor, having no relevancy with the sale consideration amounts, the respondents cannot ask the petitioner-Company to pay more stamp duty on the basis of the credit facilities offered by the Bank to the debtor, when the properties in question had been auction-sold and purchased by the auction-purchaser like the petitioner-Company.
9. Accordingly, the impugned orders/notices, dated 10.2.2009 are set aside. The cases are remitted to the respondents with a direction to the respondents to register the sale deeds in question immediately and return the documents to the petitioner-Company.
10. The Writ Petitions are allowed with the above observations. No costs. The Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
cs To
1. Inspector General of Registration, Department of Registration, Government of Tamil Nadu, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 004.
2. District Revenue Officers (Stamps), District Collector's Office, Chennai-600 001.
3. The Joint Sub-Registrar-I, District Registrar-Office, No.182, Bharathi Salai, Royapettah, Chennai-600 014.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

M/S.Gold Earth Properties vs Inspector General Of ...

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
28 August, 2009