Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Smt. Kesharbai Bajaj on 14 July, 2014
W.A. No.525/2014
14/07/2014
Shri Samdarshi Tiwari, Government Advocate for the
appellants/State.
Shri Ashok Agrawal, Advocate waives notice on behalf
of the respondent.
Heard counsel for the parties.
As short question is involved, the appeal is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent.
This appeal takes exception to the decision of the learned Single Judge dated 23rd January, 2013, in Writ Petition No.16336/2005, and dated 13th February, 2014, in Review Petition No.303/2013.
The respondent filed writ petition challenging the Circular dated 9th September, 2005, issued by the State Government, and further for direction against the appellants herein to refund the amount of Rs.4.00 lacs which was paid by the respondent for purchase of stamp paper.
No doubt, the Circular dated 9 th September, 2005, has already been quashed by this Court in the case of Hussain Shah Vs. Sub Registrar, Nagda and others, 2009 (4) MPLJ
270. However, after perusing the order passed by the Sub Registrar on 27th October, 2005, it transpires that the figure arrived at in the said order was worked out without reference to the contents of the Circular dated 9th September, 2005. More so, it is also noticed that the writ petitioner had agreed to pay the amount. It is also undisputed that the respondent did not challenge the said decision dated 27 th October, 2005, by way of statutory remedy of appeal or for that matter in the writ petition filed in this Court in December, 2005. In absence of challenge to the said decision, which having been passed on the basis of consent to pay the amount as recorded in the order, it is not open to the respondent to assail the same; coupled with the fact that the decision dated 27th October, 2005, passed by the Sub Registrar having been allowed to attain finality - whether the respondent could be heard on the relief of refund, has not been addressed by the learned Single Judge, as such.
In our opinion, therefore, it would be appropriate to set aside the impugned decisions passed in writ petition as well as review petition of the learned Single Judge and restore the writ petition to the file to its original number to proceed for hearing afresh before the learned Single Judge. All questions are left open.
Writ Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
(A.M.Khanwilkar) (Alok Aradhe)
Chief Justice Judge
DV