IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 8875 of 2008. Date of Decision: 29th May, 2009. Nem Nath Jain & Anr. Petitioner through Mr. J.S.Toor, Advocate Versus The Estate Officer, U.T.,Chandigarh & Anr. Respondents through Mr. Karan Bhardwaj, Advocate CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) The petitioners seek a direction to the respondents to transfer ownership rights in respect of the property bearing SCO No. 82-83, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh and House No. 101, Sector 8, Chandigarh on the basis of the family settlement dated 10.3.2005 [Annexure P-1]. It is an admitted fact that in order to transfer the ownership rights qua the aforementioned properties as per the family settlement, the petitioners have already deposited the requisite charges as calculated by the respondents. The transfer has, however, been withheld by the respondents on the premise that it amounts to 'exchange of the properties' for which the petitioners are required to deposit 3% stamp duty charges payable on the Deed for Exchange of the properties. Aggrieved, the petitioners have approached this Court. Notice of motion was issued and in response thereto, the respondents have filed their reply/counter-affidavit reiterating their stand. There is no denial to the fact that the parties to the family settlement [Annexure P-1] were joint owners of both the properties, referred to above. That being so, the objection raised by the respondents that it is a case of transfer or exchange of the properties is wholly misconceived. The family settlement reveals that certain properties are jointly owned by the family and through an amicable settlement, the same have now been divided by them as per their respective shares. For the reasons stated above, the writ petition is allowed and the respondents are directed to transfer Property bearing SCO No. 82-83, Sector 17-C, Chandigarh and House No. 101, Sector 8, Chandigarh in favour of the petitioners on the basis of the family settlement, more so when the requisite charges have already been paid by them, however, subject to any other condition that may be required to be fulfilled in law. Dasti. May 29, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE