CWP No.13586 of 2007 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.13586 of 2007 Date of Decision : October 28, 2010 Harmandir Singh ....Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SURYA KANT. Present : Mr.Vikas Mehsempuri, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.K.D.S.Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. -.- 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. The petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 11.7.2005 (Annexurte P-2) passed by the Collector, Sangrur, whereby he has been asked to affix the additional Stamp Duty and Registration Fee amounting to Rs.1,02,540/- on the `agreement to sell’ dated 13.6.2002 of the residential house alongwith the land purportedly for a sale consideration of Rs.17.50 lacs. The petitioner is also aggrieved by the order dated 16.5.2007 (Annexure P-4) passed by the Commissioner, 1 CWP No.13586 of 2007 Patiala Division Patiala, dismissing his appeal against the above mentioned order of the Collector, Sangrur. 2] The solitary question that arises for consideration is as to whether the `stamp duty’ is liable to be affixed for the registration of an `agreement to sell’ of an immovable property, the possession whereof has also been delivered to the vendee? While the petitioner’s contention is that the agreement to sell dated 13.6.2002 has not been acted upon and the date for execution of the sale deed has been extended time and again at the instance of the vendor, the Collector has invoked his powers under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamps Act 1899 (in short `the Act’) on the plea that once the substantial part of the sale consideration has been paid and possession of the immovable property delivered to the vendee, the parties are required to affix the stamp duty on such `agreement to sell’ as per the Schedule-1-A (as applicable in the State of Punjab) of the Act. 3] Suffice it to note that Schedule-1-A of the Act at Sr.No.5 (cc) provides as follows:- “5. Agreement or Memorandum of an Agreement: (cc) in the case of agreement to sell followed by or evidencing delivery of possession of the immoveable property agreed to be sold. The same duty as is leviable under column 2 of entry No.3 of this Schedule, subject to the adjustment of duty chargeable at the time of execution of conveyance made in pursuance of such agreement. 4] It may be seen that in the case of an `agreement to sell’, followed by delivery of possession of the immovable property agreed to 2 CWP No.13586 of 2007 be sold, the stamp duty is leviable at the same rate as prescribed for execution of a Conveyance Deed at Sr.No.23 of the same Schedule. 5] It is not in dispute that in terms of the subject `agreement to sell’, the vendor agreed to sell the house/land in question to the petitioner for a consideration of Rs.17.50 lacs, out of which the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.17.09 lacs to the vendor in advance and has got physical possession of the house to be sold. The instrument in question, thus, fulfills all the ingredients of Clause 5 (cc) of Schedule 1- A, reproduced above. Concededly, the Collector has assessed the stamp duty charges and registration fee strictly as per the rate prescribed for a Conveyance Deed at Sr.No.23 of the same Schedule. That being so, no legal or factual error has been committed by the authorities warranting any interference by this Court. 6] For the reasons aforestaed, the writ petition is dismissed, however, without any costs. October 28, 2010 (SURYA KANT) *mohinder JUDGE 3