2022 (11) TMI 1434 - SCH - Indian Laws

Maintainability of SLP - Applicability of stamp duty - certificate of sale - can be regarded as conveyance or not - HELD THAT - Reference made to the judgments by the Madras High Court in the Board of Revenue No.2 of 1875 (In Re Case Referred) dated 19.10.1875 opining that a certificate of sale cannot be regarded as a conveyance subject to stamp duty, by the Allahabad High Court in Adit Ram v. Masarat-un-Nissa 1883 (5) TMI 1 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT opining that a sale certificate is not an instrument of the kind mentioned in clause (b) of Section 17 of Act III of 1877 and is not compulsorily registrable and this Court s view in ESJAYPEE IMPEX PVT. LTD. VERSUS ASST. GENERAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER, CANARA BANK 2021 (1) TMI 1308 - SUPREME COURT opining that the mandate of law in terms of Section 17(2)(xii) read with Section 89(4) of the Registration Act, 1908 only required the Authorised Officer of the Bank under the SARFAESI Act to hand over the duly validated Sale Certificate to the Auction Purchase with a copy forwarded to the Registering Authorities to be filed in Book I as per Section 89 of the Registration Act and order of this Court in REALTY ASSOCIATES VERSUS THE ASST. GENERAL MANAGER AND AUTHORIZED OFFICER ANR. 2021 (10) TMI 1424 - SUPREME COURT opining that once a direction is issued for the duly validated certificate to be issued to the auction purchaser with a copy forwarded to the registering authorities to be filed in Book I as per Section 89 of the Registration Act, it has the same effect as registration and obviates the requirement of any further action. It is time that the authorities stop filing unnecessary special leave petitions only with the objective of attaining some kind of a final dismissal from this Court every time. Costs this time has been spared but will not be spared the next time. The special leave petitions are dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Interference with impugned judgment on stamp duty for sale certificate, consistent legal views for 150 years, unnecessary filing of special leave petitions, compliance with impugned judgment within 15 days.

Analysis:
The Supreme Court addressed the issue of interference with the impugned judgment on stamp duty for a sale certificate. The counsel for the petitioner attempted to persuade the Court to intervene but was unsuccessful. The Court noted that this issue has been settled for a considerable period, with a consistent view followed for the past 150 years. Reference was made to historical judgments by the Madras High Court, Allahabad High Court, and a previous decision of the Supreme Court to support this position. These precedents highlighted that a sale certificate does not constitute a conveyance subject to stamp duty and is not compulsorily registrable under the relevant laws. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to established legal principles and historical interpretations in such matters.

The Court also expressed displeasure at the practice of authorities filing unnecessary special leave petitions merely to seek a final dismissal from the Court. It cautioned against such actions, indicating that costs may be imposed in the future if such behavior persists. The Court emphasized the need for judicial resources to be utilized effectively and not wasted on frivolous or redundant litigation. This directive aimed to streamline the legal process and discourage unnecessary appeals that do not serve a genuine legal purpose.

Furthermore, the Court issued a clear directive for compliance with the impugned judgment within a specified timeline of 15 days from the date of the order. This instruction underscored the importance of timely adherence to judicial decisions and legal obligations. Failure to comply within the stipulated timeframe could result in further legal consequences or actions. The Court's emphasis on timely compliance aimed to ensure the effective implementation of legal rulings and uphold the integrity of the judicial system.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court dismissed the special leave petitions in the case and disposed of any pending applications. The Court's decision reinforced the importance of respecting established legal principles, discouraging frivolous litigation practices, and ensuring prompt compliance with judicial directives. The judgment underscored the need for legal clarity, adherence to precedents, and efficient utilization of judicial resources to maintain the effectiveness and integrity of the legal system.