Gojan Educational Trust vs Unknown on 17 September, 2010

Madras High Court Madras High Court Gojan Educational Trust vs Unknown on 17 September, 2010 DATED: 17.09.2010 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.Nos.14320, 14321, 14457 and 14458 of 2010 & M.P.Nos.1 of 2010 1 GOJAN EDUCATIONAL TRUST REP. BY ITS TRUSTEE G.NATARAJAN NO.190, LAKE VIEW ROAD CHENNAI-33. [ PETITIONER IN ALL W.Ps. ] Vs 1 THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER (STAMPS) COLLECTORATE OFFICE SINGARAVELAR MAALIGAI FIRST LINE BEACH CHENNAI-1. [ RESPONDENT IN ALL W.Ps ] Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings/ orders of the respondent in Tha.Pa.No.16/2004, Tha.Pa.No.18/2004 Tha.Pa.No.17/2004 and Tha.Pa.No.14/2004 dated 9.10.2009 in so far as it relates to the petitioner registered pending document Nos.4708/01, 4700/01, 4701/01 and 4795/01 dated 29th December 2000, 29th December 2000, 29th December 2000, 10th December 2001 respectively and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to conduct proper enquiry after issuing proper notices to the petitioner as contemplated under section 47A of Indian Stamp Act (Tamilnadu Stamp Manual). For petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatesah For respondent : Mr.N.Senthil Kumar, AGP ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondent.
Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/212095/ 1

Gojan Educational Trust vs Unknown on 17 September, 2010

2. Admittedly the issue involved in all these cases is covered by an earlier order passed by this court in Tata Coffee Limited vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2008 (3) CTC 614, wherein this Court has held that in respect of the proceedings under section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, the procedure contemplated under Rule 15 has to be followed and the Collector has to issue Notice in Form-I. 3. However, the grievance of the petitioner in these cases is that Form-I has not been issued and the procedure as contemplated under Rule 15 has not been followed. However, a final order has been passed directing the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty along with 2% interest on the basis that there has been delay on the part of the petitioner. 4. On the basis that the procedure contemplated under the Act has not been followed, the impugned orders stand set aside and the matter is remitted back to the respondent for a fresh adjudication in respect of the alleged undervaluation by the competent authority including the right of appeal and revision if any and based on the ultimate decision that may be arrived therein by the authorities, it is for the authorities to recover the deficit stamp duty in accordance with the provisions of the Stamp Act. All the Writ Petitions are allowed accordingly. No costs. The connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. 17.09.2010 Index:Yes Internet:Yes ajr To 1 THE DISTRICT REVENUE OFFICER (STAMPS) COLLECTORATE OFFICE SINGARAVELAR MAALIGAI FIRST LINE BEACH CHENNAI-1. P.JYOTHIMANI,J. Ajr W.P.Nos.14320, 14321, 14457 and 14458 of 2010 17.09.2010

Indian Kanoon - http://indiankanoon.org/doc/212095/