SHYAMAL KUMAR ROYversusSUSHIL KUMAR AGARWAL
2006 INSC 75931 October 2006Dismissed
Shymal Kumar Roy and Sushil Kumar Agarwal entered into a development agreement in 1995. The agreement was exhibited as evidence in a suit for specific performance on 17‑02‑2003 without any objection. Two years later, Roy sought to have the document impounded under Section 38 of the Indian Stamp Act, claiming it was ins…
C.J. PAUL AND ORS.versusDISTRICT COLLECTOR AND ORS.
2009 INSC 98031 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants purchased land in Tamil Nadu by deeds dated 1‑Feb‑1990. The Sub‑Registrar became aware of the deeds only on 30‑Mar‑1996 and, in 1998, initiated proceedings under Sections 47A(1) and 198 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, to recover deficit stamp duty. The appellants contended that the actions were barred by …
THE COMMITTEE-GFILversusLIBRA BUILDTECH PRIVATE LTD. & ORS.
2015 INSC 71830 September 2015Case Allowed
The Supreme Court examined whether Libra Buildtech Private Ltd. and other bidders, who had paid Rs.6.22 crore as stamp duty for sale deeds of properties of a liquidated company, could claim a refund after the sale was cancelled and the sale consideration was returned. The Court held that the cancellation of the contrac…
LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIAversusTHE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.
2024 INSC 35830 April 2024Dismissed
Life Insurance Corporation of India (LIC) issued several insurance policies in Rajasthan between 1993-94 and 2001-02 and, due to the unavailability of India Insurance stamps in the state, purchased the stamps from Maharashtra. The Rajasthan government issued show‑cause notices demanding payment of stamp duty on those p…
VIJAYversusUNION OF INDIA & ORS.
2023 INSC 103029 November 2023Appeal(s) allowed
Vijay entered into an agreement to sell immovable property with the Union of India on 4 February 1988 and later sued for specific performance. The defendant denied the agreement's existence, prompting Vijay to seek admission of a photocopy of the agreement as secondary evidence, arguing that the document was not charge…
SOMAIYA ORGANICS (INDIA) LTD., ETC.versusBOARD OF REVENUE, U.P., ETC.
1985 INSC 24429 November 1985Dismissed
Godavari Sugar Mills sold land and buildings to Somaiya Organics for Rs.7,76,000, but the sale was subject to an equitable mortgage created in favour of Punjab National Bank for a contingent liability of Rs.65,00,000. The Sub‑Registrar and Collector treated the total consideration as Rs.1,92,76,000, leading to a disput…
SUKUMAR DEversusBIMALA AUDDY & ORS.
2013 INSC 72528 October 2013Dismissed
A decree for Rs.6,600 was passed in 1967 and the judgment debtors' property was auctioned in 1990, where the petitioners purchased it for Rs.1.5 lakh. The judgment debtor (Respondent No.4) sought to set aside the sale under Order 21 Rule 89 of the CPC, leading to a series of revisions and recalculations of the amount d…
BIDYUT SARKAR & ANR.versusKANCHILAL PAL (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. & ANR.
2024 INSC 70428 August 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a 1999 agreement to sell land, but the agreement was marked as Exhibit‑1 with an objection for insufficient stamp duty. The trial court dismissed the suit, holding the agreement inadmissible under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Calcutta High Court reversed that de…
STATE OF UTTARANCHALversusM/S. KHURANA BROTHERS
2010 INSC 74627 October 2010Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Uttaranchal auctioned crude resin and the highest bid was placed by Khurana Brothers, leading to a formal contract of sale dated 24 March 2001 and an acceptance letter on 7 April 2001 requiring the resin to be lifted within 60 days. The issue before the Supreme Court was whether this contract amounted to a…
MADHYA PRADESH ROAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONversusVINCENT DANIEL AND OTHERS
2025 INSC 40827 March 2025Dismissed
The Madhya Pradesh Road Development Corporation sought to acquire land for a highway project and determined compensation using the circle rate fixed under the Indian Stamp Act, as prescribed by the Collector’s Guidelines. The landowners challenged the award, arguing that the compensation was excessive and that the "the…
THE SUB REGISTRAR, AMUDALAVALASA & ANR.versusM/S DANKUNI STEELS LTD. & ORS.
2023 INSC 43126 April 2023Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined a sale deed executed by the Official Liquidator of a liquidated company, which conveyed land, building, civil works, plant and machinery, and other assets for a total consideration of Rs.8.35 crores. The first respondent, a nominee of the auction purchaser, sought registration of only the lan…
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERSversusDR. RAO, V.B.J. CHELIKANI AND OTHERS
2024 INSC 89425 November 2024Disposed off
The case concerned several Government Orders (GoMs) issued by the Andhra Pradesh (now Telangana) government that allotted public land at basic rates to a select class of persons – MPs, MLAs, All India Services officers, judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts, and journalists – through cooperative societies. The pe…
SHANTI BHUSHAN (D) THR. LR. & ORSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS
2023 INSC 42525 April 2023Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants purchased a 7,818 sq. m. property in Allahabad as tenants and paid stamp duty based on a market value of Rs.6,67,200 calculated using the municipal property‑tax method. The Assistant Stamp Collector re‑valued the land at Rs.24,000 per sq. m., fixing a market value of over Rs.19 crore and demanding a larg…
M/S N. N. GLOBAL MERCANTILE PRIVATE LIMITEDversusM/S INDO UNIQUE FLAME LTD. & ORS.
2023 INSC 42325 April 2023Reference answered
The case concerns a sub-contract (Work Order) containing an arbitration clause, which was unstamped. The appellant argued that the arbitration agreement was unenforceable due to non-payment of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Supreme Court, by a 3:2 majority, held that an arbitration agreement contained…
GOVERNMENT OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS.versusSMT. P. LAXMI DEVI
2008 INSC 24725 February 2008Case Allowed
The appellant State challenged a High Court order that declared Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, as amended by Andhra Pradesh Act 8 of 1998, unconstitutional. The amendment requires a party to deposit 50% of the deficit stamp duty before a registering officer can refer the instrument to the Collector for valuation.…
INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP (INDIA) PVT. LTD. & ANR.versusWATERLINE HOTELS PVT. LTD.
2022 INSC 9025 January 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The Intercontinental Hotels Group (India) and its associate entered into a Hotel Management Agreement (HMA) with Waterline Hotels, which required the latter to pay incentive fees for renovations. Waterline Hotels failed to pay and later terminated the HMA, prompting the petitioners to invoke the arbitration clause and …
JAWAJEE NAGNATHAMversusTHE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADILABAD, AP., ETC.
1994 INSC 2925 January 1994Dismissed
The appellant owned 18 guntas of land in Adilabad municipality that were acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. Compensation was initially based on letting value and later enhanced to Rs. 75 per square yard by the reference court. The appellant claimed a market value of Rs. 300 per square yard, relying on the B…
N.P. SASEENDRANversusN.P. PONNAMMA & ORS.
2025 INSC 38824 March 2025Dismissed
The appellant (son) challenged a decree of the Kerala High Court that declared a 1985 deed executed by his father in favour of his sister (plaintiff) to be a settlement and a valid gift, thereby invalidating a later cancellation deed and sale deed dated 19.10.1993. The core issue was whether the 1985 instrument was a g…
SMT. SHANTI DEVI L. SINGH AND ANR.versusTAX RECOVERY OFFICER AND ORS.
1990 INSC 15223 April 1990Appeal(s) allowed
The petitioners purchased immovable property at auction sales conducted by the Tax Recovery Officer (TRO) for recovery of income‑tax and were issued certificates of sale. They approached the Sub‑Registrar to register the certificates, but the Sub‑Registrar and the Collector of Stamps refused unless stamp duty was paid.…
KHUSHI RAM & ORS.versusNAWAL SINGH & ORS.
2021 INSC 10622 February 2021Dismissed
The case concerned a consent decree dated 19‑08‑1991 that confirmed a family settlement whereby Smt. Jagno, a Hindu widow, transferred her half‑share in agricultural land to her nephews. The appellants challenged the decree on two grounds: (i) that the decree should have been registered under Section 17 of the Indian R…
THE GOVT. OF TAMIL NADUversusPV. ENTER. REP. BY SCM JAMALUDEEN AND ORS.
2000 INSC 53621 November 2000Dismissed
The Tamil Nadu Government issued a circular directing registration officers to refuse registration of property documents suspected of being undervalued until the correct stamp duty was collected. The petitioners challenged the circular as violative of Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The High Court quashed th…
MADHYA PRADESH HOUSING AND INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT BOARD & ORS.versusB. S. S. PARIHAR & ORS.
2015 INSC 50521 July 2015Case Partly allowed
The Madhya Pradesh Housing and Infrastructure Development Board advertised a housing scheme in 2007 stating that the prices were provisional and the final price would be fixed after completion. The Board later fixed a final price of Rs.30,000 per square metre, substantially higher than the provisional cost of Rs.16,500…
M/S. SMS TEA ESTATES PVT. LTD.versusM/S. CHANDMARI TEA CO. PVT. LTD.
2011 INSC 50820 July 2011
The appellant, SMS Tea Estates, entered into a 30‑year lease deed with the respondent, Chandmari Tea Co., which contained Clause 35 mandating arbitration of disputes. The lease deed was not registered, though registration was compulsory, and it was also not duly stamped. The appellant sought appointment of an arbitrato…
RAYMOND LTD. AND ANR.versusSTATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.
2007 INSC 18020 February 2007Dismissed
Raymond Ltd. sought to sell its cement division and applied to the Collector under Section 31 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for pre‑assessment of stamp duty. The Collector, after valuation, assessed duty and, under Section 32, endorsed the deed of conveyance, after which the instrument was stamped and registered. The S…
SATISH KUMARversusZARIF AHMED AND ORS.
1997 INSC 17720 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Satish Kumar, leased immovable property to the respondent, Zarif Ahmed, for eleven months at a monthly rent of Rs.220. After the tenant defaulted, the landlord obtained a decree of ejectment from the trial court, which the High Court set aside on the ground that the unregistered lease deed could not be a…
STATE OF U.P. & ORS.versusAMBRISH TANDON & ANR.
2012 INSC 4720 January 2012Dismissed
The respondents purchased a house in Lucknow, paid stamp duty based on its residential use at the time of sale, and executed a sale deed on 16 April 2003. A spot inspection by the District Magistrate later found a larger area and higher valuation, leading the Additional Collector to issue an order under the Indian Stam…
MUKESHversusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR
2024 INSC 102619 December 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, Mukesh, filed a suit claiming ownership and long possession of a small parcel of land in Madhya Pradesh and obtained a compromise decree confirming his pre‑existing right. The decree was used to seek mutation of the land in his name, but the Collector of Stamps levied stamp duty on the basis of Article 2…
TRIDESHWAR DAYAL AND ANR.versusMAHESHWAR DAYAL AND ORS.
1989 INSC 39019 December 1989Disposed off
A family dispute led to an arbitration award in 1973, which was filed before a civil court for making it a rule of court. The court ordered impounding of the award in 1976, a decision confirmed by the High Court in 1981 and upheld by the Supreme Court in 1983. Respondent No.1 later approached the Collector to summon th…
THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR.versusM/S FERROUS ALLOY FORGINGS P LTD. & ORS.
2024 INSC 89019 November 2024Dismissed
The State of Punjab appealed a High Court order that directed the original sale certificate of auction‑purchased property to be handed over to the purchaser and that the stamp duty deposited by the purchaser be refunded. The dispute arose from the liquidation of M/s Punjab United Forge Ltd., where M/s Ferrous Alloy For…
M/S REWA TOLLWAY P. LTD.versusTHE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
2024 INSC 53919 July 2024Case Partly allowed
M/s Rewa Tollway entered into a BOT concession agreement with Madhya Pradesh Rajya Setu Nirman Nigam Ltd. in 2002, believing, based on executive clarifications, that no stamp duty would be payable. The State later amended the Indian Stamp (M.P.) Act in 2002, imposing a 2% stamp duty on the amount spent by the lessee, a…
KAUSHIK PREMKUMAR MISHRA & ANR.versusKANJI RAVARIA @ KANJI & ANR.
2024 INSC 54019 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants purchased half of a 3.40‑hectare land from respondent No.2 in 1985, and a sale deed was executed on 02‑12‑1985 but remained unregistered due to stamp‑duty deficiency until 14‑06‑2011. Respondent No.2 later executed a second conveyance in 2010 in favour of respondent No.1 for the same land, leading the ap…
THIRUVENGADA PILLAIversusNAVANEETHAMMAL & ANR.
2008 INSC 21719 February 2008Dismissed
The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of a sale agreement dated 5 January 1980, which the defendant denied executing. The agreement was written on two stamp papers purchased in 1973 and 1978, and the plaintiff failed to produce expert fingerprint analysis to prove the thumb impression on the document. The…
M/S TECNIMONT PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS
2019 INSC 105418 September 2019Disposed off
The Punjab Value Added Tax Act, 2005 requires a 25% pre‑deposit of the additional demand before a first appeal can be entertained under Section 62(5). Assessors, including Punjab State Power Corporation, filed appeals and sought waiver of this requirement on grounds of financial hardship, challenging the provision as o…
SBI GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD.versusKRISH SPINNING
2024 INSC 53218 July 2024Disposed off
SBI General Insurance issued a fire insurance policy to Krish Spinning, which settled the first fire claim by a discharge voucher and payment of Rs 84,19,579. Krish Spinning later disputed the quantum of the settlement, alleging coercion, and invoked the arbitration clause in the policy by filing a Section 11(6) applic…
DR. POORNIMA ADVANI & ANRversusGOVERNMENT OF NCT & ANR.
2025 INSC 26218 February 2025Disposed off
The appellants purchased an e‑stamp paper for a property transaction which was subsequently lost, prompting them to seek a refund of the stamp duty of Rs 28,10,000. The Delhi High Court ordered a refund of the principal amount but declined interest, leading the appellants to file a Letters Patent Appeal, which was dism…
S.N. MATHURversusBOARD OF REVENUE & ORS.
2009 INSC 20818 February 2009Case Partly allowed
AVINASH KUMAR CHAUHANversusVIJAY KRISHNA MISHRA
2008 INSC 146517 December 2008Dismissed
The appellant, Avinash Kumar Chauhan, purchased land from respondent Vijay Krishna Mishra, a Scheduled Tribe member, and paid the full consideration and took possession, but the transfer required the collector’s permission under the C.G. Land Revenue Code, which was denied. Chauhan sued for recovery of the consideratio…
MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF DELHIversusPRAMOD KUMAR GUPTA
1990 INSC 38817 December 1990Dismissed
The Municipal Corporation of Delhi appealed against a High Court order that held only stamp duty, and not the surcharge under section 147 of the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, was payable on a sale certificate issued by a civil court under Order XXI, Rule 94 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The respondent had bought a…
TRUSTEES OF H.C. DHANDA TRUSTversusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS.
2020 INSC 55117 September 2020Case Partly allowed
The H.C. Dhanda Trust executed a Deed of Assent to vest two immovable properties in its beneficiaries, paying only Rs.200 stamp duty. The Collector of Stamps treated the deed as a gift deed, levied a deficit duty of Rs.1.28 crore and imposed a ten‑times penalty of Rs.12.80 crore, which was upheld by the Board of Revenu…
BLACK PEARL HOTELS (PVT) LTD.versusM/S PLANET M RETAIL LTD.
2017 INSC 126617 February 2017Appeal(s) allowed
Black Pearl Hotels (Pvt) Ltd. entered into a "conducting agreement" with M/s Planet M Retail Ltd. and later sought arbitration under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The High Court Judge, invoking s.33(2)(b) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957, referred the matter to the Registrar to determine whether the instr…
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.versusM/S KHANDAKA JAIN JEWELLERS
2007 INSC 115716 November 2007Appeal(s) allowed
Mis Khandaka Jain Jewellers entered into agreements to purchase two properties in 1983, but the vendors failed to execute sale deeds. The firm obtained specific performance decrees in 1994, after which the court executed the sale deeds in 1995 and sent them for registration. The Sub‑Registrar, invoking Section 47A of t…
VIJAY KUMAR GOYAL (DEAD) THR. LR.versusNEENA RANI & ORS.
2022 INSC 96916 September 2022Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, original plaintiff, filed a suit for specific performance of a 1996 Memorandum of Agreement and a 2011 agreement to sell concerning a piece of land. The trial court directed him to pay deficient stamp duty with penalty under Entry No.5 of Schedule 1‑A of the Indian Stamp Act (Punjab), a view affirmed by …
THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, TAMIL NADU AND ORS.versusK. BASKARAN
2020 INSC 42815 June 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The Supreme Court examined appeals filed by the Inspector General of Registration, Tamil Nadu and others against K. Baskaran concerning the valuation of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 and the Tamil Nadu Stamp (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1968. It held that Rule 11‑A authorises the a…
V.V.S RAMA SHARMA & ORS.versusSTATE OF U.P. & ORS.
2009 INSC 50815 April 2009Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants, former officers of the Life Insurance Corporation of India, were charged under IPC sections 420 and 409 and Stamp Act sections 64 and 69 for allegedly purchasing insurance stamps from vendors outside Uttar Pradesh, causing a loss to the State. They filed writ petitions seeking quashing of the FIR, which…
RAMACHANDRA REDDY (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.versusRAMULU AMMAL (DEAD) THR. LRS.
2024 INSC 86814 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The dispute arose from a 1963 instrument by which two brothers transferred their share of a family property to their sister-in-law Govindammal. The lower courts held that the instrument was a valid settlement deed granting her a two‑thirds share, while the High Court reversed this, deeming it a gift deed for lack of ad…
CHILAKURI GANGULAPPAversusREVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MADANPALLE AND ANR.
2001 INSC 14514 March 2001Appeal(s) allowed
Chilakuri Gangulappa filed a civil suit to enforce a sale agreement that was found to be insufficiently stamped. The Munsif Court impounded the document and sent it to the Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO), who, after assessing market value, imposed a penalty of ten times the stamp duty deficiency. The appellant appeale…
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHIversusUNION OF INDIA
2019 INSC 19414 February 2019Disposed off
The case involves multiple appeals arising from a Delhi High Court judgment concerning the division of powers between the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD) and the Lieutenant Governor (LG) under Article 239AA of the Constitution. The Supreme Court Constitution Bench had earlier interpreted Artic…
IN RE: INTERPLAY BETWEEN ARBITRATION AGREEMENTS UNDER THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996 AND THE INDIAN STAMP ACT 1899versus.
2023 INSC 106613 December 2023Directions issued
The Supreme Court examined whether an arbitration agreement embedded in an unstamped or insufficiently stamped contract is void, unenforceable, or merely inadmissible under the Indian Stamp Act. It held that such agreements are only inadmissible as evidence under Section 35 of the Stamp Act and that non‑stamping is a c…
M/S SHRIRAM EPC LIMITEDversusRIOGLASS SOLAR SA
2018 INSC 81613 September 2018Dismissed
The parties obtained an ICC arbitral award in London ordering RioGlass Solar to pay Shriram EPC Ltd €4.36 million. Shriram filed a petition under Section 47 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to enforce the foreign award in India, while RioGlass contended that the award was unenforceable because it had not b…
HAMEED JOHARAN (D) AND ORS.versusABDUL SALAM (D) BY LRS. AND ORS.
2001 INSC 36113 August 2001Dismissed
In a partition suit, a final decree was passed on 20‑Nov‑1970 but the decree holder failed to furnish the required stamp paper, delaying the drawing up of the decree. The decree holder's legal representatives filed an execution petition on 21‑May‑1984, more than twelve years after the decree. The respondents argued tha…
DR. CHIRANJI LAL (D) BY LRS.versusHARI DAS (D) BY LRS.
2005 INSC 27913 May 2005Appeal(s) allowed
In a partition suit, a final decree was passed on 7 August 1981 but was not engrossed on stamp paper until the respondents furnished the required stamp papers on 25 May 1982. The appellant filed an execution application on 21 March 1994, arguing that it was barred by the 12‑year limitation period under Article 136 of t…
LAL CHANDversusUNION OF INDIA & ANOTHER
2009 INSC 104412 August 2009Disposed off
The case concerned the determination of market value for lands in Rithala village, Delhi, acquired under four notifications of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Delhi High Court had based compensation on Delhi Development Authority (DDA) allotment rates and limited sale deed evidence, awarding Rs.67,536 per bigha for…
SURAJ LAMP & INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD.versusSTATE OF HARYANA & ANR.
2011 INSC 73911 October 2011Disposed off
The Supreme Court examined the legality of transactions that rely on Sale Agreements, General Power of Attorney or Wills (collectively termed SA/GPA/Will transfers) as a mode of transferring immovable property. It observed that such arrangements are used to evade stamp duty, registration fees and to facilitate black‑mo…
BHOOP SINGHversusRAM SINGH MAJOR AND ORS.
1995 INSC 55311 September 1995Dismissed
The petitioners, heirs of a common ancestor, claimed a one‑third share in land, relying on a 1973 declaratory decree that had been obtained on the basis of the defendant’s written admission of their title. The decree was never registered. The trial court held the decree illegal; the appellate courts dismissed the petit…
SANTOSH JAYASWAL AND ANR.versusSTATE OF M.P. AND ORS.
1995 INSC 55711 September 1995Disposed off
The State of Madhya Pradesh granted the appellants a right to catch fish in government tanks. The appellants argued that this right was merely a licence and therefore not subject to compulsory registration under the Indian Registration Act, 1908 or stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Supreme Court held tha…
BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITEDversusM/S. NEMICHAND DAMODARDAS & ANR.
2022 INSC 69711 July 2022Appeal(s) allowed
Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL) appealed against a Bombay High Court order that had increased compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act from Rs.21 per sq. ft. to Rs.174 per sq. ft., relying on the Ready Reckoner rates. BSNL argued that the Ready Reckoner, prepared for stamp‑duty purposes, cannot…
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIAversusSRI P. NAGARAJU @ CHELUVAIAH & ANR
2022 INSC 68911 July 2022Case Partly allowed
The National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) challenged arbitral awards that enhanced compensation for land acquired under the National Highways Act, arguing that the arbitrator improperly relied on post‑acquisition guideline values and failed to give sufficient reasons, violating Sections 28(2) and 31(3) of the Arb…
STATE OF M.P.versusRAKESH KOHLI & ANR.
2012 INSC 23411 May 2012Appeal(s) allowed
The State of Madhya Pradesh challenged the constitutional validity of clause (d) of Article 45 in Schedule 1‑A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, as amended by the Madhya Pradesh Stamp Amendment Act, 2002, which imposes a 2% stamp duty on power‑of‑attorney instruments given without consideration to persons who are not bloo…
REGISTRAR OF ASSURANCES & ANR.versusASL VYAPAR PRIVATE LTD. & ANR
2022 INSC 119210 November 2022Dismissed
The Supreme Court considered two related disputes where the Registrar of Assurances, invoking Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, demanded additional stamp duty on properties sold by court‑ordered public auctions – one arising from a partition suit and the other from a company liquidation. In both cases the sale…
GARWARE WALL ROPES LTD.versusCOASTAL MARINE CONSTRUCTIONS & ENGINEERING LTD.
2019 INSC 51110 April 2019Appeal(s) allowed
Garware Wall Ropes Ltd. entered into a sub‑contract with Coastal Marine Constructions & Engineering Ltd. that contained an arbitration clause but the sub‑contract was not stamped. When the respondent filed a petition under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for appointment of an arbitrator, the Bo…
G.M. SHAHUL HAMEEDversusJAYANTHI R. HEGDE
2024 INSC 4939 July 2024Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant filed a civil suit challenging a sale deed, while the respondent filed a counter suit. During the respondent's suit, a General Power of Attorney (GPA) that was insufficiently stamped was tendered as evidence; the trial court admitted it and marked it as an exhibit without any objection or judicial determi…
M/S. ANSAL HOUSING AND CONSTRUCTION LIMITEDversusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS
2016 INSC 2529 March 2016Disposed off
The dispute involved Mis Ansal Housing and Construction Ltd (the developer) and the allottees regarding stamp duty liability under Sections 33 and 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, in connection with a bipartite agreement between the State of Uttar Pradesh and the developer and a tripartite agreement among the State, …
S.P. GOELversusCOLLECTOR OF STAMPS
1995 INSC 8638 December 1995Dismissed
S.P. Goel applied to register a will, but the Sub‑Registrar impounded it, deeming it a deed of conveyance that was not duly stamped. The Collector of Stamps required additional documents and payment of stamp duty before registration could proceed. Goel filed a complaint under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, alleging…
K. S. SHIVADEVAMMA AND ORS. ETC.versusASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER AND ANR.
1995 INSC 8678 December 1995Dismissed
The Supreme Court heard an appeal by owners of 9 acres 10 guntas of agricultural land acquired for a bus stand. The Land Acquisition Officer initially awarded Rs 5,000 per acre, the civil court raised it to Rs 30,000 per acre, and the High Court, after deducting 53% under building rules and a further 33 ⅓% for developm…
M/S GODWIN CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.versusCOMMISSIONER, MEERUT DIVISION & ANR.
2025 INSC 12078 October 2025Dismissed
Godwin Construction Pvt. Ltd. executed a document titled “Security Bond cum Mortgage Deed” in favour of the Meerut Development Authority to secure its obligations under a development project. The authorities later claimed that the instrument attracted stamp duty under Article 40 of Schedule 1‑B of the Indian Stamp Act,…
YELLAPU UMA MAHESWARI &ANR.versusBUDDHA JAGADHEESWARARAO & ORS.
2015 INSC 7558 October 2015Case Partly allowed
In a partition suit, the defendants sought to introduce two unregistered documents (Exhibit B‑21, a deed of memorandum, and Exhibit B‑22, an agreement) to prove the division of property. The trial court and the Andhra Pradesh High Court held the documents inadmissible, reasoning that they were compulsorily registerable…
HARIOM AGRAWALversusPRAKASH CHAND MAL VIYA
2007 INSC 10128 October 2007Dismissed
The appellant Hariom Agrawal sought to admit a photocopy of a tenancy agreement as secondary evidence after the original was allegedly stolen. The agreement, required to bear a Re.1 stamp, instead had a notarial stamp of Rs.4, i.e., a stamp of sufficient amount but improper description. The trial court admitted the pho…
ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) & OTHERSversusSHELF DRILLING RON TAPPMEYER LTD. ETC.
2025 INSC 9468 August 2025
The Supreme Court examined the interplay between Section 144C, which provides a special dispute‑resolution procedure for eligible assessees, and Section 153(3) of the Income Tax Act, which prescribes a twelve‑month limitation for fresh assessments. The Court held that the limitation under Section 153 applies only to th…
M/S TIRUPATI DEVELOPERSversusSTATE OF UTTARAKHAND & ORS.
2013 INSC 5278 August 2013Dismissed
The case involved eleven sale agreements executed by M/s Tirupati Developers for parcels of land in Uttarakhand. The Deputy Registrar impounded the agreements alleging deficient stamp duty and the Assistant Commissioner ordered payment of the deficit, penalty and interest. The appellant contended that no stamp duty was…
V.N. DEVEDOSSversusCHIEF REVENUE CONTROL OFFICER-CUM-INS. AND ORS.
2009 INSC 7488 May 2009Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant purchased 60.86 acres of land belonging to Dunlop India Ltd, a sick company, through an open‑market tender conducted by an Asset Sales Committee appointed under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985. The sale deed was executed at Rs 24.34 crore and registered. The revenue authoritie…
SAMIULLAHversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
2025 INSC 12927 November 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellants challenged the Bihar Registration Rules, 2008 amendments that introduced sub‑rules (xvii) and (xviii) to Rule 19, which made the production of jamabandi or holding‑allotment proof a condition precedent for registering sale or gift documents. The High Court of Patna dismissed the writ petitions, holding t…
GOQII TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITEDversusSOKRATI TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED
2024 INSC 8537 November 2024Appeal(s) allowed
Goqii Technologies (appellant) entered a Master Services Agreement with Sokrati Technologies (respondent) containing an arbitration clause (Clause 18.12). After paying over Rs 5.5 crore, Goqii raised concerns based on an independent audit reporting alleged overcharges and fraudulent practices, and invoked arbitration u…
OMPRAKASHversusLAXMINARAYAN & ORS.
2013 INSC 6857 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed
The plaintiffs filed a suit for specific performance, possession and injunction based on an agreement to sell dated 27 December 2000, which recited that physical possession of the land had been handed over to them. The defendants denied the execution of the agreement and the delivery of possession. The trial court held…
STATE OF HARYANA & OTHERSversusNAVIR SINGH AND ANOTHER
2013 INSC 6877 October 2013Appeal(s) allowed
NASIRUDDIN & ANR. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH THROUGH SECRETARY & ORS
2017 INSC 11916 December 2017Dismissed
The Municipal Corporation of Meerut awarded contracts to several appellants for the collection of "Tehbazari" (a local toll) and parking fees. The appellants challenged the demand of the Collector of Stamps that the contracts be treated as leases and attract stamp duty at Rs.70 per thousand. The High Court upheld the C…
ADARSH SAHKARI GRIH NIRMAN SWAWLAMBI SOCIETY LTD.versusTHE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.
2025 INSC 13895 December 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a cooperative society registered under the Jharkhand Self‑Supporting Cooperative Societies Act, sought exemption from stamp duty on a land transfer to its members under Section 9A of the Stamp (Bihar Amendment) Act, 1988. The State, through a memorandum issued by the Principal Secretary, Department of Re…
MOHAMMADE YUSUF & ORS.versusRAJKUMAR & ORS.
2020 INSC 1335 February 2020Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant filed a suit in 1984 for a 7‑biswa parcel of land and a compromise decree was passed on 4 October 1985 granting them title to that parcel. In a later suit filed in 1998, the respondents sought an injunction over the same land and, during trial, the appellant attempted to introduce the 1985 compromise decr…
BOARD OF REVENUE, U.P. STATE OF U.P. AND ORS.versusM/S. ELECTRONIC INDUSTRIES OF INDIA, ISHWARI SINGH AND ANR.
1995 INSC 5334 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed
The Board of Revenue, Uttar Pradesh appealed against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court which had held that a mortgage deed of immovable property situated in an area covered by the U.P. Town Improvement Act was a deed of transfer but that the additional duty under Section 67‑H of that Act was not stamp duty and the…
AMEER MINHAJversusDIERDRE ELIZABETH (WRIGHT) ISSAR AND ORS.
2018 INSC 5784 July 2018Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant filed a suit for specific performance of a 2003 agreement to sell land, relying on an unregistered sale deed, a registered power of attorney, and an earlier unregistered 1995 agreement. The respondents challenged the admissibility of these documents, arguing that the 2003 deed required registration under …
SEETHARAMA SHETTYversusMONAPPA SHETTY
2024 INSC 6502 September 2024Case Partly allowed
The appellant sought a perpetual injunction claiming possession of agricultural land under an agreement of sale dated 29‑06‑1999, which the respondent contested as insufficiently stamped and therefore inadmissible. The respondent filed an application under Section 33 of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 to impound the agre…
CHIEF REVENUE CONTROLLING OFFICER CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, & ORS.versusP. BABU
2025 INSC 442 January 2025Dismissed
The petitioners, revenue officers, challenged the High Court's order that set aside the valuation of two sale deeds which the Joint Sub-Registrar had deemed undervalued and referred to the Special Deputy Collector under Section 47‑A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. The Registering Officer issued Form I notices fixing inf…
DISTT. REGISTRAR & COLLECTOR, HYDERABAD AND ANR.versusCANARA BANK ETC.
2004 INSC 6311 November 2004Dismissed
The Andhra Pradesh amendment of Section 73 of the Indian Stamp Act gave the Collector power to inspect, seize and impound any registers, books or documents, including those in banks, without any procedural safeguards. The High Court struck down this provision as unconstitutional, and the State appealed. The Supreme Cou…
GOPI KRISHNA TRIVEDIversusSUDAMA PRASAD OJHA
2008 INSC 10021 September 2008Dismissed
In a suit for specific performance of a sale of immovable property, the parties entered into an oral agreement and later produced a written document containing the terms and conditions of that agreement along with rent receipts. The trial court refused to impound the documents, holding they were not instruments requiri…
AMAN BHATIAversusSTATE (GNCT OF DELHI)
2025 INSC 6181 May 2025Appeal(s) allowed
The appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, was caught in a sting operation after demanding Rs 12 for a Rs 10 stamp paper and was convicted under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The key issue was whether a licensed stamp vendor qualifies as a “public servant” under Section 2(c)(i) …
ADDL.DISTT.SUB-REGISTRAR SILIGURIversusPAWAN KUMAR VERMA AND OTHERS
2013 INSC 2971 May 2013Appeal(s) allowed
A partition suit filed in 1999 was compromised in 2001 and the decree was presented for registration in 2007. The trial court directed the Additional District Sub‑Registrar, Siliguri to register the partition deed based on the stamp duty calculated from the suit valuation of Rs.50 lakh. The registrar objected, stating …