Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 – s.4 and Explanation 1 to Article 25 of Schedule I – Registration Act, 1908 – s.17 – Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – s.53A – Appellants instituted a suit seeking declaration and injunction – Defendant No.46 took out an application u/ss. 33, 34 & 37 of the 1958 Act r/w. s.17 of the Registration Act, to impound the six original agreements for sale viz., Exh.145/3 dated 20.07.1994, Exh.145/9 dated 20.07.1994, Exh.145/15 dated 12.10.1994, Exh.145/19 dated 12.10.1994, Exh.145/23 dated 27.04.2006 and Exh.145/25 dated 19.09.2004 produced by the appellants, so as to get them registered, on the premise that the said documents include a clause that the physical possession of the properties mentioned therein, was transferred to the purchasers; however, they were not duly stamped; and hence, the documents require the payment of stamp duty of the conveyance – Correctness: Held: In the instant case, in the documents, though there was a clause for conveyance between the vendors and purchasers in relation to the respective properties, the value of the properties were above Rs.100/- and there was also a clause by which possession was admittedly handed over on the date of the agreement, implying acquisition of possessory rights protected under Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, which requires payment of proper stamp duty and registration as mandated under Section 17 of the Registration Act – Further, as per Section 4(2) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, the parties are at liberty to determine as to which of the document shall be principal document – As noted, the agreement for sale consists of a clause whereby the possession was handed over to the purchaser satisfying the requirement to treat the instrument as conveyance and what remained was only the formality of execution of the sale deed – Therefore, it can be safely concluded that the agreement for sale was the principal document on which stamp duty was to be paid as per Article 25 – Even considering the contention of the appellant, that the sale agreements ultimately concluded in the sale deed on which stamp duty was paid, would not by ipso facto absolve the primary liability of paying the appropriate stamp duty at the time of execution of the sale agreement as it was the principal document – Therefore, this Court is of the opinion that Section 4 of the Act cannot come to the aid of the appellants – Therefore, all these six documents ought to have been necessarily stamped and registered. [Para 14]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.