SAMAPTI CHATTERJEE, J. - (1.) The petitioners filed this writ petition seeking for the following reliefs:- (a) A writ of or in the nature of mandamus do issue, commanding the respondent authorities to forthwith recall and/or cancel and/or set aside and/or withdraw the impugned notice dated May 26, 2004 along with the impugned order being passed by the respondent authorities ; (b) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondent No.2 to register the said deed of lease and after registration of the same to hand over the original document to your petitioners; (c) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondent No.2 to register all the remaining 19 deed of lease covered by the Registration receipts and after completion of the registration formalities to hand over the original deed of lease covered by the said 19 receipts; (d) A writ of and/or in the nature of certiorari do issue commanding the respondent No.4 to transmit all records relating to passing of the order dated September 24, 2015 so that the said order may be quashed and conscionable justice is done to your petitioner; (e) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondent No.4 to withdraw the observation communicated by its Memo No.374 dated September 24, 2015 and to cancel the same ; (f) A writ of and/or in the nature of mandamus do issue commanding the respondent No.4 not to give effect or further effect to the said order dated September 24, 2015; (g) Rule NISI in terms of prayers above ; (h) An order of injunction restraining the respondent authorities from giving any effect and/or further effect and/or acting further in terms of the said impugned notice dated May 26, 2004 as well as the order being issued and/or passed by the respondent authorities till the disposal of the writ petition ; (i) Ad-interim order in terms of the prayer above ; (j) Such other or further order or orders be passed, direction or directions be given as to this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper.
(2.) The petitioners' case in a nutshell is as follows:- Sometime in September 2003 eight lease deeds were executed in favour of eight separate trust and were placed for registration before theRegistering Officer of the Additional Registrar of Assurance-II, Kolkata, the respondent no. 2 herein who provisionally registered the same. On 1st December, 2003 further twelve lease deeds were executed in favour of the twelve separate trust and were also tendered for registration before the respondent no.2. Those twelve deeds were provisionally registered by the respondent no.2. On 1st/2nd December, 2003 those deed of lease were submitted for registration before the Additional Registrar of Assurance-II, Kolkata , Government of West Bengal with the registration charges of Rs.1,842/-. On 26th May, 2004 petitioners received Memo Nos. 251, 252, 253, 255, 256, 257, 258, 260, 261, 262, 263, 265, 266, 267 and 268 from the Registrar of Assurance-II , Kolkata determining the market value of the property at Rs.24,24,008/- and required the petitioners to deposit Rs.2,25,370/- as deficit stamp duty and Rs. 26,647/- as registration charges. On 1st June, 2004 the petitioners received a memo being no. 258 first June, 2004. On 18th June, 2004 the petitioners through its advocate submitted a written reply for recalling and/or withdrawal of the said memo. On 9th August, 2004 the petitioners assailing the said memo filed writ petition being W.P. No.1446 of 2004. Thereafter on 24th August, 2004 the Hon'ble court, inter alia, directed that those deeds be forwarded by the registering authority to the Collector who will conduct a hearing to the petitioners and pass a reasoned order. On 15th September, 2004, Deputy Inspector General being the Collector of Stamp passed an order in respect of those twenty deed of lease. On 16th September, 2004 Collector issued a notice for determining the market value of the property under Section 47(A) of the Stamp Act. Thereafter on 28th November, 2004 assailing the notice issued by the Collector for making valuation of the properties under Section 47(A) of the Stamp Act another writ petition was filed by the petitioner being W.P No.1766 of 2004 which the Court disposed of by directing the Collector to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Thereafter on 21st July, 2011 petitioners received a letter from the Collector interalia informing that the file could not be traced out and M/s S. Jalan and Company was directed to visit the Collector with challans showing deposit of adjudication fees though the petitioners already on 21st July, 2011 deposited the adjudication fees. Therefore again on 27th April, 2012 petitioners filed a writ petition being no.373 of 2012 assailing the order dated 26th May, 2004 and for a direction for registration of nineteen lease deeds. Thereafter on 19th July, 2012 the Hon'ble Court directed the Collector to look into the deed of lease and asses the stamp duty payable by the petitioners on or before September 20, 2012. Pursuant to the said order the Collector fixed 31st August, 2012 for hearing at 12:30 P.M. and the order was communicated to the petitioners on 24th September, 2012 by the Collector. Thereafter on 3rd October, 2012 the writ petition was amended and the said order passed by the Collector was also challenged before this Hon'ble Court. On 29th January, 2013 this Hon'ble Court granted liberty to the petitioners to challenge the valuation made by the Collector before the Appellate Authority. Accordingly on 9th March, 2013 appeal was filed under Section 47-B of the Stamp Act before the Appellate Authority being the Commissioner of Stamp Revenue (P.D), West Bengal. On 15th July, 2015 the Commissioner of Stamp Revenue (P.D) West Bengal was pleased to set aside the order dated 21st September, 2012 passed by the Collector of Kolkata and granted leave to the petitioners to file an appeal before D.I.G RR-I, Alipore within one month from the date of such order. Accordingly, in August, 2015 petitioners filed an appeal before D.I.G , RR-I Alipore. By the impugned order dated 24th September, 2014 D.I.G, RR-I, Alipore held that the instrument was a lease but proceeded to determine the market value of property being the subject matter of lease deed. Hence, this present writ petition. In the backdrop of the case alone the only legal issue to be determined in this case is : Whether the instruments involved in this case are deeds of lease or deeds of conveyance ? Submissions of the Learned Advocates
(3.) Mr. Sarvapriyo Mukherjee, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioners strongly submitted that at the material time when the lease deeds were executed there was no provision for assessment of market value for the execution of lease deed under Article 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899; only after amendment of 2012 provision for payment of market value was inserted under Article 35. However, by the impugned order the Collector under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and the Deputy Inspector General -II, Alipore, Bhabani Bhawan treating those lease deeds as deed of conveyances directed that the market value in terms of Article 23 of the Stamp schedule of the Indian Stamp Act , 1899 should be assessed and accordingly he assessed the market value each of the property in each of the deeds bearing serial nos.7034-7040, 7047 dated 22.09.2003 and 8186-8197 dated 01.12.2003 aggregating Rs.24,24,005/- and determined the stamp duty payable as under:- Stamp duty payable @ 10% = Rs.2,42,420/- Stamp duty paid = Rs.17,050/- Deficit Stamp Duty = Rs.2,25,370/- ;