C.W.P. No.23316 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.23316 of 2011 Date of Decision. 15.12.2011 Harsh minor son of Sh. Summer Singh son of Sh. Balbir Singh through his father Sumer Singh through his father Sumer Singh being natural guardian, resident of Kothi No.5, Defence Colony, Hissar (Haryana) .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents 2. C.W.P. No.23317 of 2011 Harsh minor son of Smt. Sunita Devi wife of Sh. Sumer Singh through his father Sumer Singh being natural guardian, resident of Kothi No.5, Defence Colony, Hissar (Haryana) .....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others .....Respondents Present: Mr. Jitender Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not ? Yes 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes -.- K. KANNAN J.(ORAL) 1. Both the writ petitions are connected and they address the same issue of the registration of a document executed by a person in favour of another, who held no pre-existing interest in the property. The point taken before the Registering Authority was that the document must have been registered as a conveyance for a release pre-supposes of an issue of pre- existing right in favour of the releasee and consequently the stamp duty has to be collected as a conveyance. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner relies on a judgment of this Court in Harjot Singh and others Vs. Gurjit Singh and others 2011 (2) C.W.P. No.23316 of 2011 -2- Volume 70 1 that a release will be valid. The learned Judge was considering the case in a dispute between persons, who were impeaching the document as not making possible a transfer of interest in the property. The Court was not considering the issue of how the document has to be stamped. That is precisely the issue, which is brought through this impugned order and which was not a point for consideration in the judgment referred to by the counsel. 3. It has been held by the decision in Kuppuswami Chettiar v. A. S. P. A. Arumungam Chettiar AIR 1967 SC 1395 that a release which contains words of sufficient amplitude to transfer right in the property will operate as conveyance, even though it may not be acted upon as a release. Again the nomenclature employed in a document does not always conclude the manner by which the document must be stamped as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.N. Mathur Vs. Board of Revenue (2009) 13 SCC 301. The documents which were submitted for registration although styled as release will still operate to create valid transfer of title and if stamp duty is assessed treating those document as conveyance, it is perfectly justified and I find no reason to differ with the view, which is taken. The challenge to impugned orders cannot, therefore, survive favourable consideration and both the writ petitions are dismissed. The respondent shall properly assess the value of the land as per the Collector's rate at the time of registration and collect the stamp duty. (K. KANNAN) JUDGE December 15, 2011 Pankaj*