Fr. Lucas I vs State Of M.P. And Anr. on 10 August, 2007
Prayer for interim relief is for stay of operation of the
Amended Schedule of Fees under Rule 4 of the Rules of
1998 as published in Gazette notification dated 12.6.2015,
in particular Entry/Item No.5 as also the demand letter
dated 26.6.29015 and to direct the respondent Registrar to
register the subject property/land purchased by the
petitioner forthwith. The main writ petition has already
been admitted in terms of order dt.8.9.2015. As regards
interim relief, the petitioner was given time to file proper
affidavit as per liberty given by the Court on 08.09.2015,
to offer explanation in support of the prayer for interim
relief. The argument now canvassed is, essentially, with
reference to the observations in the decision in the case of
Fr.Lucas I Vs. State of M.P., 2008(2) MPLJ 381, in
particular paragraph No.21 thereof. No doubt, in the said
decision, the Court found that the fee prescribed for
registration of sale of property, was exorbitant and had no
(2)
nexus with the object. It amounted to imposition of tax in
the garb of regulation. The question is assuming that the
petitioner has made out prima facie case, for which reason
the writ petition has been admitted, will the petitioner
suffer irreparable loss, if the interim relief is refused. In our
opinion, the amount to be paid by the petitioner is
computed as Rs.12.60 lakh only for recording registration
in respect of property worth rupees more than four crores.
If the petitioner eventually succeeds, the Court can always
direct the Authorities to refund the entire amount or part of
it alongwith appropriate interest thereon. In that sense, it is
not a case of irreparable loss to be caused to the petitioner
especially when Court can also direct the Authorities to
refund the amount with interest, as may be quantified. The
question is only of registration of document tendered by
the petitioner. We are not inclined to grant interim relief,
but, make it clear that if the petition succeeds, the Court
may direct the Authorities to refund the amount, which is
found to be excessive demand along with interest, as may
be quantified at the final hearing.