Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Jaswant Kaur & Others vs State Of Punjab & Others on 13 October, 2010

Author: Adarsh Kumar Goel

Bench: Adarsh Kumar Goel, Ajay Kumar Mittal

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                         CHANDIGARH.

                                         L.P.A. No.1328 of 2010
                                     Date of decision: 13.10.2010

Jaswant Kaur & others.
                                                   -----Appellants.
                               Vs.
State of Punjab & others.
                                                -----Respondents

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL
        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL

Present:-   Mr. Ashwani Chopra, Sr. Advocate with
            Mr. Ashish Chopra & Mr. Amarjit Markan, Advocates
            for the appellants.
                    ---


ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.

1. This appeal has been preferred against order of learned Single Judge, dismissing the application of the petitioner for stay of demand of stamp duty. Basis of impugned demand of stamp duty was that rate applicable at the time of registration of sale deed and not at the time of allotment by a Government agency was relevant.

2. Case of the appellants is that there was no justification for demand of higher stamp duty. Valuation has to be as per the consideration in the document executed by a Government agency as provided in notification dated 2.3.2009, Annexure P-7. Reliance has also been placed on DB judgment of this Court dated 2.8.2010 in L.P.A. No.890 of 2010 State of L.P.A. No.1328 of 2010 2 Punjab & others v. Parshotam Dass & another, affirming the view taken by learned Single Judge on the issue involved.

3. Even though Division Bench of this Court may not normally interfere with the order of learned Single Judge at interim stage, but point raised on behalf of the appellant may require consideration in view of judgment relied upon. Since this aspect has not been earlier pointed out before Hon'ble Single Judge, it will be appropriate that the appellant raises this issue before learned Single Judge.

4. In view of above, we dispose of this appeal with liberty to the appellants to approach learned Single Judge with the grievance raised in the appeal as mentioned above.


                                      (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)
                                              JUDGE


October 13, 2010                       ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL )
ashwani                                        JUDGE