f c'< - _r^ IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR UR.IT PETITION NO.^/^OF 1996 :? R~^' IN THE MATTER OF_ ';: ^r^ -9\ ^ ;J'T'S wy ^•fi 't f??«ETITIONERS£ -.'^ . m;?i^,^^ ^•t \ SEJ /; ^_ // ,.-y RESPONDENTS -1. 2. 3. 4. M/S JAIN CARBIDE AND CHEMICALS (PRIVATE) LIMITED, a company duly incorporated Under the Indian CoiTsparaiss Act, 1956, hsving its registsred of'fics/factory at 563 & 564, Urla Industrial fireay Raipur^ M»P» OM PRAKASH AGRAWAL, aged 46 years, son of th& R»R. Agrawal, Indian Citizen, Share-holder and Director of the Pstitionsr rl4o c 1y resident af Civil Lines, Raipur.. M.P» VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH, through the Collector, Raipur M«P» THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND SUPERINTENDENT OF STAMPS, uovernment of Madhya Pradeshy Gwalior M.P. THE DISTRICT REG1STRAR and Collector of Stamps/ Raij M.P. STATE BANK OF INDIA, Phaphadih BranchyRaipur M«pl XI-HC-22 ^TT^T^T f^TWW^T $b^i<t)^rfg(T |sN- ^ 3:5T '^1<41<VI<1, «>T{1^'|<S, R<diy^< 3li^l ^5|cn Ni*i^r»i^ich ^ <20«- 3:TT^T^<TTW^f?cT DiViSION BENCH: - HON'BLE SHRI FAKHRUDD3^ & HON'BLE SHR! SUNSL KUM 11/03/2005:- Shri Y.K. Munshi, Sr. A^v., with Shri B.P. Sharma counsel for the petitioners. Shri Prashant Mishra, Agrawal, Dy. A.G., for the State/li Heard. |A.ddi. Advocate General, with Shri N.K. respondents. appear|ing Learned counsel matter is squarely covered b^ DIvislon Bench of the High Co|jrt bearing Writ Petition No.4854 matter has a!so been reportec) .48S4of199§-M/s.VJkas The points r-aised in thi| raised In aforesaid writ petitio|is Divisjon Bench ofthe High Co^rt while deciding the aforesaid| observed as under: <t)l^f<rt41^ ^l^^TTfte^t^^K ^3Tf^T3TT^T |,Ag.CJ. 4 ARSSNH/:,J. This casehas been re^eived on transfer from the High Court of Madhya Pradesh. for the State very fairiy stated that this order dated 07/02/2003 passed by the ofMadhya Pradesh in bunch ofcases f 1999 and fhe connected matters, This in 2003 (il IV1PJR - SN 62 {W.P. No. Industries Vs. State of SVS.P.} C_docrete petition are simiiar to that of the points and the same have been decided by of Madhya Pradesh. It is submitted that writ petitions, the Division Bench has (^^f^) XI-HC-22 S^^ll^ld^, ^Tfl<M4j?, fc(^1W^< 3ll^l ^5|cn -^^.•.;.^...^(.^. ^w^\ ^w^-9------—- ^f 2fte— 3Tf^T^T RRT^W^T $FRt®F^TfN' '~\ Ift^fit^^^^^^^® ' i,^- ^TT^T ^cTT^K ^cT 2- - (a) "There is a dsffe^ namely, (b)The State Legiij provide the rate^ read with Entry) Scheduie of the (c) There is no disij relating to immc|vab stamp duty because it is simiiar property on the ground i| area; (d) Section 75 of th^ proviso to Secti^n effect from the forcei.e. 25/01/1^94 (e) The retroactivity the persons wh wouid be liable persons who would not be ha^e cbi^I<n41Ti *4iH<nT^'tel:^'<f^«i< ^3Tf^T3TI^T |ehce between the two concepts, stamp di|ity and rate of duty; i^lature has the competence to 4 of stamp duty as per Entry 63 44 of List-lil of the Seventh (ponstitution; ^imination because a document immc|vabie property is liable to extra undler Section 75 of the 1993 Act sitliated within the biock whereas a |s not liabie to excess duty soleiy is situated within the IVIunicipal i^ 1993 Act is intra vires and the 75 is to be given retrospective ^ate when Section 75 came into 1; and Iwould have limited effect so that have not paid the stamp duty |o pay under the proviso but the paid under the main provision entltledtorefund." (lft^^fe^t) XI-HC-22 3T1^T^T ^TT^3:n^T s^^|cb^f?cT s^1k^- %w^ 73( ^WW^, ^W[<o, fcjdiy^< 3ii^i M5i cn ....................... ^ ^^_ ^ *<I^C<11 ^zHT^ Learned counsel appea legai position. in view of the submjssi(; parties and, particulariy the f^ the dedsion of the Djvision pefition stands finajiy disposed| Learned counsel for th deposit. The security amount, i| be no order as to cos v l cbi^fd4l4 ^i^^iT^ tel<ft <Ri<-<-i< ^3Tf^T3:n^T \mQ for the petitioner does not dispute this 1ns made by the counsel appearing for the |ct that this matter is/squareiy covered by Behch of HJgh Court of Madhya Pradesh, this lofwith the observations quoted above. e petitioners prays for refund of security any; deposited, be refunded. There shall Sd/- Ag. Chief Justice Sd/- Sunil Kumar Sinha Judge (4^^^)