Writ Petition No. 35523 of 2024 · The High Court · 2023
Case Details
- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION NO. 35523 OF 2024 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: HANAMANT RAO YELGURD RAO DESAI, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, S/O SHRI YELGURD RAO DESAI HAVING RESIDENCE AT FLAT NO.1051 PRESTIGE MISTY WATERS KEMPAPURA, HEBBAL BENGALURU-560024
Legal Reasoning
(BY SRI. ANIRUDH R.S., ADV. FOR SMT. SUSHMA NAGRAJ, ADVOCATE) AND: …PETITIONER Digitally signed by NAGAVENI Location: High Court of Karnataka 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA REP. BY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, BEING THE CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY HAVING OFFICE AT KANDAAYA BHAVAN 8TH FLOOR, KG ROAD BENGALURU - 560 009 2. ASSISTANT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION (COMPUTER BRANCH) DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION HAVING OFFICE AT KANDAAYA BHAVAN 8TH FLOOR, KG ROAD BENGALURU-560009 - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 3. DISTRICT REGISTRAR DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION HAVING OFFICE AT NO.8, 2ND AND 3RD FLOOR BBMP WARD NEAR BALAMURI GANAPATHI TEMPLE, 3RD CROSS TATA NAGAR KODIGEHALLI BANGALORE-560092 4. SUB REGISTRAR DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION HAVING ITS OFFICE AT KACHARAKANAHALLI NO.798, RAMANJINI COMPLEX, PHILOMENA HOSPITAL ROAD PATEL MUNIVENKATAPPA LAYOUT NAGAWARA BANGALORE-560045 (BY SRI. MOHAMMAD JAFFAR, AGA) …RESPONDENTS THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, THEREBY, QUASHING AND/OR SETTING ASIDE THE IMPUGNED ORDER DATED 30 OCTOBER 2023 PASSED BY LD. DISTRICT REGISTRAR, RESPONDENT NO. 3 HEREIN, PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE- A AS BEING PASSED WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF LAW, PATENT ERROR OF JURISDICTION AND ALSO AGAINST THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE ULTRA VIRES TO THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA AND DECLARING THAT NO SUCH ALLEGED STAMP DUTY COULD BE RETAINED BY RESPONDENT IN TERMS OF THE KARNATAKA STAMP DUTY, 1957 AND THE KARNATAKA REGISTRATION ACT AND RULES THEREINDIRECT TO THE RESPONDENT NO. 3 TO PASS APPROPRIATE REVISED ORDER IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE INSTRUCTIONS OF THE RESPONDENT NO.1, ISSUING A DIRECTION TO THE RESPONDENTS JOINTLY OR SEVERALLY, TO REFUND THE AMOUNT OF RS. 3,26,555 (RUPEES THREE LAKHS TWENTY-SIX THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED FIFTY-FIVE ONLY), TO THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH INTEREST AT THE RATE OF 18 PERCENT PER ANNUM FROM THE DATE OF SUCH PAYMENT TILL THE PAYMENT AND/OR REALIZATION THEREOF, AS PER THE STATEMENT AT ANNEXURE M HERETO, WRONGFULLY COLLECTED AS STAMP DUTY TWICE FOR THE REGISTRATION OF THE SAME DOCUMENT, FOR SAME PROPERTY BETWEEN THE SAME PARTIES AND FURTHER WRONGFULLY RETAINED BY THE RESPONDENTS AND ETC. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA ORAL ORDER The petitioner is before this Court calling in question an order dated 30.10.2023 seeking refund of the amount. 2. Heard the learned counsel Sri.Anirudh R.S., for Smt.Sushma Nagraj, appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Advocate, Sri.Mohammad Jaffar, appearing for the respondents. 3. The facts, in brief, germane are as follows: The petitioner submitted an application for registration of a sale deed before the fourth respondent - Sub-Registrar. The stamp duty as necessary for the said registration was paid at Rs.3,26,555/-. The application could not be processed owing to certain technical glitch faced by the office of the Sub-Registrar on the said date. The Sub-Registrar is said to have advised the petitioner to withdraw the application and resubmit the application. On resubmission of the application, the registration - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 goes successful, but while so registering, the petitioner is said to have paid Rs.3,26,555/- for the second time. After the registration gets over, the petitioner submits a representation seeking complete refund of the amount that was paid on the first occasion, which did not come through owing to technical glitch faced in the Sub-Registrar's office. The representation comes to be partially allowed by directing refund of Rs.2,45,980/- deducting Rs.80,575/-. It is therefore, the petitioner is before this Court. 4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contentions of respective learned counsel and have perused the material on record. 5. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The learned AGA would admit the fact that the office of the Sub-Registrar faced a technical glitch on 29.09.2023 at the first instance when the sale deed was sought to be registered, but the petitioner had paid the stamp duty of Rs.3,26,555/- for the purpose of registration. The technical glitch could not get the document registered at the first instance, but the petitioner - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 was directed to re-file the application along with another set of stamp duty of the same amount. Therefore, it is an admitted fact that the petitioner has paid the stamp duty twice over not on his own volition, but on the direction of the Sub-Registrar owing to certain technical glitch. The petitioner seeks refund. The learned AGA submits that there is no provision in law to grant the entire refund, as the application has been resubmitted by the petitioner. The said submission is noted only to be rejected. 6. The resubmission of the application is not because of the petitioner's folly but on the folly of the State of not having an appropriate solution to technical glitches in Kavery- 2.0 Software. Therefore, the petitioner cannot be saddled on with the burden of the State not solving the technical glitch. 7. The petitioner thus becomes entitled to complete refund of the amount, as the State cannot enrich itself on the amount of any citizen unless the law permits. Law in the case at hand does not permit, as it is not because of the petitioner paying twice over, but owing to technical glitch and the - 6 - NC: 2025:KHC:9168 WP No. 35523 of 2024 Sub-Registrar directing payment twice over. Therefore, the petition deserves to succeed with the prayer to be granted, owing to the peculiar facts and circumstances obtaining in the case at hand. 8. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:
Decision
ORDER i) The writ petition is allowed; ii) The amount of Rs.3,26,555/- shall be refunded in its entirety to the petitioner, within two weeks from the date of receipt of the copy of the order; iii) In the event, the amount is not paid, within two weeks, from the date of receipt, the petitioner shall become entitled to interest at 9% per annum to be paid, from the date it was withheld, till the date the amount reaches the doors of the petitioner. Ordered accordingly. Sd/- (M.NAGAPRASANNA) JUDGE KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 44