Stamp Duty When Sale Not Materialized
An agreement is executed for sale of Property. The seller refuses to transfer and the buyer files a suit for Specific Performance. The Court impounds the agreements and orders it to be sent to IG Stamps. The buyer challenges the order of the Trial Court & on the first hearing itself the matter is compromised BEFORE THE HIGH COURT between the buyer and the seller and the property remains with the seller himself.
The HC in his order writes specifically “That due to the compromise between the parties the order of the Lower Court by itself becomes infructuous” which in other words means that the order of the Lower Court is as good as not having pronounced which means that no one including the Trial Court could act upon the order
Yet (after receipt of the order) the Trial Court Judge sends the impounded Stamp Paper to the IG Stamps. the concerned sub-registrar issues notices to the parties but the buyer doesn’t receive the notice due to his having changed the address and the Sub Registrar Ex Parte issues a decree against the buyer.
QUERIES:
1. Was the Trial Court having powers to send the agreement to IG stamps in furtherance of its order when the HC has pronounced the order as infructuous?
2. Does the stamp duty lie on a transaction which has not materialized and the property concerned not changing hands in any manner & remaining with the seller himself (though due to the compromise)
3. What is the remedy in such a situation?
