Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd v. Collector of Stamps Enforcement – I, Mumbai & Anr.
Case at a glance
Outcome
Dismissed
With the above observations, writ petition is dismissed
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. We accordingly, permit the petitioner to move an application before 2 the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 53(1A) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. Since the petitioner has lost some time in pursuing the writ petition, we direct that the objection to limitation…
- Para 33. With the above observations, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/- (S. A. BOBDE, J.)
Judgment
Ms. S. I. Shah i/by M/s. S.I.Shah & Co., for the petitioner. Mr. D. N. Nalawade, Govt. Pleader, for the Respondents. CORAM: BILAL NAZKI and S. A. BOBDE, JJ. DATED : 13TH MARCH, 2008. P. C.: This petition has been filed against an order passed on 3rd September, 2007 by the Additional Controller of Stamps, Mumbai, dismissing the petitioner's appeal under Section 32-B of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 on the ground that the appeal was not maintainable. In the reply affidavit, it has been pointed out that against this order there is an alternative remedy available to the petitioner under Section 53(1A) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 where under an application in writing can be filed before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority.
We accordingly, permit the petitioner to move an application before 2 the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority under Section 53(1A) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. Since the petitioner has lost some time in pursuing the writ petition, we direct that the objection to limitation may not be taken by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority if the application is filed by the petitioner within two weeks from today.
Operative part
With the above observations, writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- (BILAL NAZKI, J.) Sd/-
(S. A. BOBDE, J.)
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: With the above observations, writ petition is dismissed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 13 Mar 2008. The bench was S A BOBDE, BILAL NAZKI.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.