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 2, Cited by 2]

Kerala High Court

The State Of Kerala vs Abdhul Kader Musaliar Yousaf

Author: A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai

Bench: A.V.Ramakrishna Pillai

       

  

  

 
 
                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                                     PRESENT:

                        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI

                 FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2012/5TH PHALGUNA 1933

                                              OP(C).No. 59 of 2010 (O)
                                                 ------------------------
                          CMA.78/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM
                                                      -------------

PETITIONERS / RESPONDENTS :
-----------------------------------------------

          1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
              REPRESENTED BY DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM.

          2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL),
              KOTTAYAM.

          3. THE SUB REGISTRAR, KOTTAYAM ADDITIONAL.


             BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V. VIJULAL

RESPONDENT / APPELLANT :
-------------------------------------------

             ABDHUL KADER MUSALIAR YOUSAF,
             S/O. K.M.ABDUL KADAR MUSALIAR, KOCHUVALIYAVEETIL HOUSE,
             VAZHOOR VILLAGE, CHAMAMPATHAL.P.O.
             REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER DILEEP E. ALEX
             ERUTHICKAL, PUTHANANGADI, KOTTAYAM.P.O. - 686001

             BY ADVS. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER
                            SRI.B.RAGHUNANDANAN
                            SRI.C.DILIP
                            SMT.A.SREEKALA (VAIKOM)


            THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-02-2012,
           THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:


Mn

                                                                             ...2/-

OP(C).No. 59 of 2010 (O)



                                  APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:


EXT.P1          : COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

EXT.P2          : COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 18.6.09 OF THE DISTRICT COURT,
                  KOTTAYAM.


RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL



                                                           //TRUE COPY//



                                                          P.S. TO JUDGE


Mn



                A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
               ---------------------------------------------
                     O.P.(C) No.59 of 2010
               ---------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 24th day of February 2012

                        JUDGMENT

Under challenge in this petition is Ext.P2 order passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Kottayam in CMA No.78 of 2008 filed by the respondent against the order of the second petitioner directing the respondent to pay Rs.1,04,750/- as deficit stamp duty and Rs.16,746/- as registration fees.

2. The respondent along with his wife purchased 1.69 per cent undivided interest in 19.36 Ares of property in Muttambalam Village with right to construct an apartment having a super built up area of 113.87 sq.metres along with one covered parking area. The value set forth in the instrument is Rs.1,61,645/-. For determination of deficit stamp duty, reference under Section 45B of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was O.P.(C)No.59 of 2010 2 made by the third petitioner to the second petitioner. On objection being taken to the sufficiency of stamp duty and registration fee, the second petitioner held that the value of the property covered by the instrument is Rs.10 lakhs and directed the respondent to pay deficit stamp duty and registration fee as above.

3. The respondent filed Ext.P1 appeal before the District Court, Kottayam under Sub Section 4 of Section 45B of the Act. The learned Additional District Judge, who heard the appeal along with other appeals, set aside the final order passed by the second petitioner by the impugned order.

4. I have heard the learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel appearing for the respondents.

5. A connected petition [O.P.(C)] No.37 of 2010 arising out of the same common order passed by the Additional District Judge, Kottayam was dismissed by this Court today vide a separate detailed judgment. As no special circumstances are brought to my notice to deviate O.P.(C)No.59 of 2010 3 from the said order,Ext.P2 order is not interfered with.

6. The petition is dismissed, but without cost.

sd/- A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE css/ true copy P.S.TO JUDGE