NAIB TEHSILDAR-CUM-JOINT REGISTRAR, CHAMKAUR SAHIB Vs. PARBHAKAR COLD STORAGE, BELA, TEHSIL AND DISTT. ROPAR
LAWS(P&H)-2007-5-143
HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Decided on May 18,2007

Naib Tehsildar-Cum-Joint Registrar, Chamkaur Sahib Appellant
VERSUS
Parbhakar Cold Storage, Bela, Tehsil And Distt. Ropar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. - (1.) STATE of Punjab and its officers have filed this Regular Second Appeal against the judgment and decree passed by both the Courts below, whereby the suit of the plaintiffs for permanent injunction restraining Naib Tehsildar-cum-Joint Registrar from recovering an amount of Rs. 1,22,000/- on account of stamp duty regarding registration of mortgage deed Nos. 1145 and 1146 has been decreed.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that in this case, plaintiff-respondent No. 1 obtained some loan from the bank. To secure that loan, plaintiff No. 1 executed a mortgage deed in favour of the bank. Respondent Nos. 2 to 6 stood as guarantors to the said loan. They also executed the mortgage deed Nos. 1145 and 1146 in favour of the bank as guarantors. However, no loan was taken by these respondents. During the course of arguments, it was not disputed that the aforesaid amount of Rs. 1,22,000/- was claimed as stamp duty and registration fee only with regard to the mortgage deeds (Ex. P2 and Ex. P3) executed by respondents No. 2 to 6 in favour of the bank as guarantors.
(3.) BOTH the Courts below have come to the conclusion on the basis of the admission made by DW-1 Balwinder Singh that the guarantor is not required to pay the stamp duty. In this regard, the trial Court has observed as under :- "....This ambiguity in the document is further removed from the evidence of PW1 Sh. C.S. Dhaliwal. It is admitted case of the defendants that no stamp duty or registration fee is chargeable on mortgage deed executed by a guarantor. Once, it is proved on record that plaintiffs No. 2 to 6 executed mortgage deeds Ex. P2 and Ex. P3 only as guarantors, the defendants have no right to recover any stamp duty or registration fee regarding mortgage deeds Ex P2 and P3. Therefore, the demand raised by the defendant No. 1 for recovery of Rs. 1,22,000/- on the basis of stamp fee and registration fee on the said mortgage deeds is illegal and against law. Even no notice has been served upon them before raising demand of Rs. 1,22,000/-." ;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.