Harbhajan Singh & Ors. vs State Of Haryana & Ors.

KULDEEP TIWARI, J.(Oral)

Through the instant petition, cast under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, a challenge is thrown to the legality of order dated 31.05.2022 (Annexure P-6) passed by the Collector, Yamuna Nagar, under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamps Act as well as the order dated 17.05.2023 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Commissioner, Ambala, whereby the statutory appeal preferred by the petitioner, was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to deposit the deficient stamp duty of Rs.12,35,813/-, which includes the registration charges.

Succintly, the land of the petitioners, was acquired under the Authority awarded the compensation, in favour of the petitioners. Since, as per the petitioners, the compensation awarded was inadequate, they preferred an appeal for enhancement of compensation before the Court of enhanced and the petitioners received the same on three different occasions, i.e. on 16.08.2019 and 22.08.2019 and 18.09.2019.

After receipt of the enhanced compensation amount, the petitioners purchased agricultural land measuring 24 Bighas and 14 Biswas 02 Biswansi, situated in Village Khera, Tehsil Jagadhri, for a sale consideration of Rs.2,16,34,200/-, vide registered sale deed dated 30.06.2021. However, the Sub-Registrar impounded the sale deed and made a reference to the Collector concerned for initiation of proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Sub-Registrar pointed out a shortfall of Rs.11,80,813/- towards stamp duty and Rs.50,000/- towards registration fee.

Upon receipt of the reference, a show-cause notice was issued to the petitioners. In response thereto, the petitioners appeared and submitted that, in terms of Notification dated 03.01.2011 (Annexure P-2), issued by the Revenue and Disaster Management Department, State of Haryana, a person whose land has been acquired is exempted from payment of stamp duty and registration fee, if such person purchases agricultural land in the State of Haryana, within a period of two years, of the date of receipt of compensation amount on account of acquisition of agricultural land.

The Collector, however, concluded that the petitioners had received compensation on 03.11.2018 and, therefore, the sale deed registered on 30.06.2021 was beyond the prescribed period of two years. Accordingly, while declining the benefit of the aforesaid notification, the Collector passed the impugned order dated 31.05.2022, determining the deficiency in stamp duty and registration fee as noticed above.

The petitioners preferred a statutory appeal against the said order. However, the Appellate Authority, while accepting the reasoning adopted by the Collector, dismissed the appeal vide impugned order dated 17.05.2023.

Learned counsel for the petitioners, in order to throw challenge to the order (supra), submits that the enhanced compensation amount was deposited in the bank accounts of the petitioners on three different occasions, i.e., 16.08.2019, 18.08.2019 and 22.09.2019. Thereafter, the petitioners purchased agricultural land measuring 24 Bighas and 14 Biswas 02 Biswansi for a sale consideration of Rs.2,16,34,200/- vide sale deed dated 30.06.2021. The fact that the entire compensation amount was utilized by the petitioners in one go for purchasing agricultural land clearly establishes the purpose for which the compensation was utilized. Thus, for computing the period of two years prescribed as per the notification, the last date on which the compensation was received ought to be reckoned for counting the two years period, and not the first date on which only a part of the compensation was received.

Per contra, learned State counsel has raised two-fold submissions. Firstly, it is contended that the notification issued by the State of Haryana is not applicable to the case of the petitioners, since the enhanced compensation was released under the new Act i.e. the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (LARR Act), and, therefore, the benefit of the aforesaid notification cannot be extended to the petitioners. Secondly, it is contended that, as per the notification, it is only the date on which the compensation was received which is relevant for computing the period of two years and the date of receipt of enhanced compensation, cannot be taken into consideration.

This Court has considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and has perused the record.

Since the entire controversy revolves around notification dated 03.01.2011, it is imperative for this Court, at this stage to examine the same. The State of Haryana, in exercise of the powers conferred under Sections 78 and 79 of the Registration Act, 1908, directed that the following proviso be added to Article I of the "Table of the Registration Fee" in Appendix-I to the Haryana Registration Manual. The relevant is extracted hereinafter:-

A perusal of the above makes it ample clear that in case, a farmer, whose land was acquired by Haryana Government for public purpose, purchases an agricultural land within the State of Haryana within a period of 2 years, utilizing the compensation amount received by them in lieu of their acquired land, no stamp duty and registration fee is required to be paid.

A similar notification has also been issued on 09.11.2010, which also exempts the land owners whose land has been acquired, from payment of stamp duty on purchase of another agricultural land out of the compensation amount. The relevant is extracted hereinafter:-

In the instant case, there is no dispute with regard to the fact that the petitioners have received enhanced compensation amount on three different dates, i.e. 16.08.2019 and 22.08.2019 and 18.09.2019. It is also not under dispute that the substantial portion of compensation amount was received by the petitioners on 18.09.2019. Therefore, now the issue arises for consideration before this Court, as to whether, the initial date on which a part of the compensation was received is to be treated as the relevant date for computing the period of two years, or whether the last date on which the considerable enhanced compensation was received, is to be reckoned for the said purpose.

As per the notification dated 03.01.2011, the date of receipt of compensation, is to be considered to calculate the two years period. There cannot be any distinction, as the learned State Counsel is trying to create between “compensation” and “enhanced compensation”. The object of the aforesaid policy is to encourage the farmers of the State of Haryana, whose agricultural land has been acquired, to reinvest the compensation amount in re-purchase of the agricultural land, enabling them to continue with the agricultural profession. Therefore, the policy/notification is required to be interpreted to achieve the desired object. Both the authorities below have not considered the aspect that the petitioners have received substantial amount of compensation on the last date, i.e. 18.09.2019, therefore the period of two years is to be reckoned from the said date only. Since the sale deed dated 30.06.2021 was registered within two years from the said date, the petitioners were entitled to the benefit of the exemption contemplated under the Notification dated 03.01.2011. Consequently, the demand of deficient stamp duty and registration fee raised against the petitioners cannot be sustained. Thus, the impugned order dated 31.05.2022 passed by the Collector concerned, under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as well as the appellate order dated 17.05.2023 passed by the Commissioner, Ambala, are hereby, set aside.

The instant petition is, accordingly, allowed.

All pending application(s), if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.