Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

16. Section 45A applies to instruments of 'conveyance exchanges or gifts'. The term 'conveyance' has been defined in the Act (vide Section 2(l)(d)). But, the other two terms viz., 'exchange' and 'gifts' are not defined in the Act.

17. Whenever an instrument of conveyance, exchange or gift is presented for registration, the Registrar under the Registration Act and Section 45A of the Act, is first required to register the same in accordance with the former enactment. If on such registration, such Registrar has reason to believe that the market value of the property of that instrument has not been truly set forth in that instrument and the consequent stamp duty has not been paid thereon, he is empowered to report the same to the Deputy Commissioner of the District. The Registrar is required to examine each instrument registered by him and then make his reference to the DC of the District in the form provided by the Rules. On receipt of reference the DC is empowered to initiate action in conformity with the Act and the Rules.

2. ILR 1984 (2) KAR 411

23. Under a registered sale deed dated 13-10-1981, the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 1838 of 1983, a registered partnership firm, has purchased a building bearing Municipal Nos. 231 to 251 situated on Mysore Road in the City of Bangalore for a consideration of Rs. 8,25,116/- from its previous owner Smt. Indu Sindia. On the registration of the said document, the Registrar has made a reference to the Special Deputy Commissioner for Prevention of Under Valuation of Stamps, in Bangalore ('the DC, Bangalore') in a proforma prescribed by the Rules inter alia stating that the value of the property purchased by the petitioner was Rs.16,17,000/- as against the value of Rs. 8,25,116/-stipulated in the instrument and there was under valuation of market value of property to the extent of Rs. 9,91,884/-. On receipt of that reference the DC, Bangalore has issued a notice under Rule 4 of the Rules annexing a copy of that reference to the petitioner which is challenged principally on the ground that the Registrar in his reference to the DC, Bangalore, who also in his notice, had not even alleged that anything in excess of the stated consideration had been paid by the petitioner to its vendor and in the absence of such a statement, they were wholly unauthorised and illegal, which justify an interference at the very threshold by this Court.

24. Petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 10061 to 10066 of 1984 have purchased vacant sites in Bangalore City under different salt deeds in the year 1983 from a Cooperative Society and on registering them the Registrar has made reference to the DC, Bangalore under Section 45A of the Act. On receipt of those references, the DC, Bangalore has issued the petitioners separate show cause notices in accordance with the Rules, which have been objected to by them before that authority, on diverse grounds. On a consideration of the objections filed by the petitioners in Writ Petitions Nos. 10061 and 10062 of 1984 the DC, Bangalore has made his provisional orders and not against others. But, all these petitioners without waiting for the passing of the respective provisional and final orders against them and challenging them in appeals under the Act and the Rules, have approached this Court challenging the show cause notices and provisional orders on the very ground noticed in Writ Petition No. 1838 of 1983.