*1* wp.4866.11.911.group.sxw kps IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4866 OF 2011 Indusind Bank Ltd. and another. ..Petitioners -Versus- The Collector of Stamps and others. ..Respondents .......... Mr.V.R.Dhond a/w Ashish Kamat & Sneha Madinur i/b Crawford Bayley & Company, for the Petitioners. Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP and Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP, for the Respondents/State. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 19th July, 2011. P.C.: 1 Heard Mr.Dhond, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioners. The Petitioners impugn an order passed by the Collector of Stamps, Mumbai dated 27.04.2011 made under Section 31 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. 2 When this petition was placed before me for admission, a preliminary objection was raised on maintainability by Mr.Patne, learned AGP. He submitted that the order passed by the Collector of Stamps and impugned in this petition, is appealable under Section 53 of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 and particularly under sub-section (1A) thereof and an appeal lies to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. 3 Mr.Dhond submits that availability of an alternate remedy is not absolute bar to the maintainability of this Writ Petition and particularly when the order impugned in this petition is against the *2* wp.4866.11.911.group.sxw principles of natural justice. The Collector has not given any findings about the nature of documents/instruments and the chargeable stamp duty. Mr.Dhond submits that not entertaining a petition on this ground is a matter of caution and prudence and not a bar on maintainability of this Writ Petition. For all these reasons, Mr.Dhond submits that this Writ Petition is maintainable. 4 It is not possible to accept these contentions of Mr.Dhond. A demand notice raises a demand on the Petitioners for payment of the stamp duty by referring to Article 54(ii) under the Bombay Stamp Act. Upon a cause being shown by the Petitioners, the Collector has given a hearing to the Petitioners and rendered the findings. If the findings are vitiated for not giving any reasons and there is non compliance with the principles of natural justice; I have no doubt in my mind that the Appellate Authority will duly consider this grievance of the Petitioners and while passing the final orders, render its opinion thereon. An appeal lies to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and the appellate power is not disputed as the case is covered by Section 53(1A) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority is an officer appointed in terms of Section 2(dd) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 and he is either appointed for whole or any part of the State and it is stated that he is the Inspector General of Registration and the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, having his office at Pune. In the light of clear statutory provision and finding that the remedy of appeal is an alternate equally efficacious in this case, this Writ Petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioners to avail of the same. To enable the Petitioners to avail of this alternate remedy, it is directed that for a period of four weeks from today, no coercive measures should be initiated against the Petitioners to recover the differential stamp duty. If the Petitioners file an appeal within four *3* wp.4866.11.911.group.sxw weeks from today, the same shall be heard and decided by the Appellate Authority without raising any objection of limitation. All contentions of both parties are kept open. The Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J) *4* wp.4866.11.911.group.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4867 OF 2011 Indusind Bank Ltd. and another. ..Petitioners -Versus- The Collector of Stamps and others. ..Respondents .......... Mr.V.R.Dhond a/w Ashish Kamat & Sneha Madinur i/b Crawford Bayley & Company, for the Petitioners. Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP and Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP, for the Respondents/State. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 19th July, 2011. P.C.: 1 For the reasons recorded in the order passed today in Writ Petition No.4866/2011, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in the same terms. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J) *5* wp.4866.11.911.group.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4868 OF 2011 Indusind Bank Ltd. and another. ..Petitioners -Versus- The Collector of Stamps and others. ..Respondents .......... Mr.V.R.Dhond a/w Ashish Kamat & Sneha Madinur i/b Crawford Bayley & Company, for the Petitioners. Mr.R.M.Patne, AGP and Mr.S.R.Nargolkar, AGP, for the Respondents/State. .......... CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. Date : 19th July, 2011. P.C.: 1 Not on board. Mentioned. 2 For the reasons recorded in the order passed today in Writ Petition No.4866/2011, this Writ Petition is also disposed of in the same terms. No costs. (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J)