Allahabad High Court
Meenal Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. vs Commissioner Agra Division Agra And ... on 11 November, 2019
Author: Yashwant Varma
Bench: Yashwant Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 6 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 3149 of 2008 Petitioner :- Meenal Sahakari Avas Samiti Ltd. Respondent :- Commissioner Agra Division Agra And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- R.N. Sharma,A.K. Sharma Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Yashwant Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Kumar, the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.
This petition challenges the orders dated 20 November 2006 and 12 March 1999 passed by the respondents in proceedings under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The sole ground on which those orders are assailed before the Court presently is the orders having been made in violation of the statutory injunct as placed by Section 33(4) of the Act. Section 33(4), it becomes pertinent to recollect, provides that no action under sub-section (4) or sub-section (5) shall be taken after a period of four years from the date of execution of the instrument. In the facts of the present case, it is admitted that although the sale deed was executed on 18 July 1991, the proceedings under Section 47-A came to be initiated by the Collector only on 14 March 1997. The Court further notes that in terms of the Second Proviso appended to Section 33(5), jurisdiction stands conferred upon the respondents to initiate action notwithstanding the period of four years having expired subject to prior permission of the State Government having been taken. In the facts of the present case, it is not established either from the record or from the pleadings of parties that prior permission of the State Government as contemplated in the Second Proviso to Section 33(5) was obtained by the Collector before initiating proceedings under the Act. In that view of the matter and on this ground alone the impugned orders are rendered unsustainable.
Consequently, the instant writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders dated 20 November 2006 and 12 March 1999, are consequently quashed. It is however left open to the respondents to proceed in the matter subject to them establishing that an order of the State Government referable to the Second Proviso to Section 33(5) existed on the date of initiation of action under Section 47-A or within the time otherwise stipulated in that provision. In case action is so commenced by the respondents, the Court leaves all contentions of respective parties and other issues open for consideration.
Order Date :- 11.11.2019 Arun K. Singh (Yashwant Varma, J.)