Tripta Kaushik v. Sub Registrar Vi-A, Delhi & Anr

NAVIN CHAWLA, J MAY 20, 2020 rv/Arya

Page 1 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: 22.01.2020 Date of decision: 20.05.2020 + W.P.(C) 9193/2019 TRIPTA KAUSHIK ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Setu Niket, Adv. versus SUB REGISTRAR VI-A, DELHI & ANR ..... Respondents Through Mr.Ramesh Singh, Adv. with Mr.Chirayu Jain, Adv. + W.P.(C) 3560/2018 RAMESH SHARMA ..... Petitioner Through Mr.Attin S. Rastogi, Adv. with Mr.Archit Chauhan, Adv., Mr.Prateek Yadav, Adv. & Mr.Shivkant Arora, Adv. versus GOVERNEMENT OF N.C.T OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents Through Mr.Ramesh Singh, Adv. with Mr.Chirayu Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA 1. WP (C) 9193/2019 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 05.03.2019 passed by the respondent no. 1 impounding the Relinquishment Deed dated 01.03.2019 executed by the son of the Page 2 petitioner, Mr. Kapil Kaushik, in favour of the petitioner, with respect to the property bearing No. B-123, Ashok Vihar, Phase-I, Delhi. 2. The said property was acquired by late Shri. Brijesh Kumar Kaushik, and upon his death, the Delhi Development Authority executed a Conveyance Deed dated 07.04.2000 with respect to the said property in favour of the petitioner and her son. 3. By the Relinquishment Deed dated 01.03.2019, son of the petitioner sought to release/relinquish his rights in the said property in favour of the petitioner. 4. By the Impugned Order dated 05.03.2019, the respondent no. 1, however, impounded the said document treating the same to be as a Gift under Article 33 of Schedule IA of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 as applicable to the Union Territory of Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "Act") and thereafter held the Release Deed to be deficiently stamped and impounded the same. Aggrieved of the said order the present petition has been filed. 5. WP (C) 3560/2018 has been filed by the petitioner challenging the order dated 01.03.2013 passed by the respondent no. 3 impounding the Relinquishment Deed(s) executed by the sisters of the petitioner in favour of the petitioner with respect to their share in the property bearing No. E- 67, Greater Kailash, Part-II, New Delhi, holding that the said Relinquishment Deeds (five in number; three dated 06.07.2012 and two dated 17.07.2012) are liable to be stamped under Article 33 of the Act. Page 3 6. The petition further challenges the order dated 15.05.2013 passed by the respondent no. 2 assessing the Stamp Duty payable on the said Relinquishment Deeds at Rs. 6,60,257/- and further imposing a penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- on the petitioner. 7. The property was purchased by the parents of the petitioner, late Shri Jagdish Prashad Sharma and Smt Shanti Devi, vide a registered Sale Deed dated 10.07.1972. 8. The petitioner claims that late Shri Jagdish Prashad Sharma bequeathed his half share in the property in favour of the petitioner by way of a Will registered on 24.09.2001. 9. Late Shri Jagdish Prashad Sharma expired on 31.10.2003, leaving behind his wife, the petitioner and his five daughters as the only Class I heirs. 10. The three sisters of the petitioner executed three separate Relinquishment Deeds in favour of the petitioner on 03.07.2012 relinquishing their share in the property in favour of the petitioner. The remaining two sisters relinquished their share in the property in favour of the petitioner by way of two separate Relinquishment Deeds both dated 17.07.2012. It is claimed that these two sisters could not execute the Relinquishment Deeds on 03.07.2012 as they were not in Delhi at that time. 11. As noted hereinabove, on presentation of the Deeds for registration, they were first impounded by the respondent no. 3 vide order dated 01.03.2013 and later the respondent no. 2, vide the Impugned Order Page 4 dated 15.05.2013, assessed deficient Stamp Duty as Rs. 6,60,257/- and levied a penalty of Rs. 1 lakh. 12. The petitioner feeling aggrieved of the above orders, has filed the present petition. 13. As common question of law arises in the above two petitions, t