- 1 - NC: 2025:KHC:6577 WP No. 47773 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 13TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE JYOTI MULIMANI WRIT PETITION NO. 47773 OF 2012 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: 1. MARVIN RODRIGUES S/O LATE DR.JAMES RODRIGUES, AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS, R/AT A-2, BRUNTON RUSTUMJI, 21 BRUNTON ROAD, BANGALORE-560 025. 2. VIVIAN RODRIGUES S/O LATE DR.JAMES RODRIGUES, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, R/AT CRAIG PARK LAYOUT, 27/1 M.G.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001. …PETITIONERS (BY SRI. VIVEKANAND ANTHONY BRITTO., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, BANGALORE DIVISION, BMTC BUS TERMINUS BUILDING, K.H.ROAD, BANGALORE-560 027. 2. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER FOR DETECTION OF UNDERVALUATION OF STAMPS OF BANGALORE NORTH, SHIVAJINAGAR REGISTRATION DISTRICT, KANDAYA BAHAVAN, KEMPEGOWDA ROAD, BANGALORE-560 009. Digitally signed by PREMCHANDRA M R Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - NC: 2025:KHC:6577 WP No. 47773 of 2012 3. THE SUB-REGISTRAR, SHIVAJINAGAR REGISTRATION SUB-DISTRICT, SERPENTINE STREET, NEAR JOHNSON MARKET, BANGALORE-560 025. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, SEEKING CERTAIN RELIEFS. THIS WRIT PETITION IS LISTED FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN 'B' GROUP, THIS DAY, AN ORDER IS MADE AS UNDER: ORAL ORDER Sri.Vivekanand Anthony Britto., counsel for the petitioners and Sri.Mahantesh Shettar., AGA for the respondents have appeared in person. 2. The captioned Writ Petition is filed seeking a Writ of Certiorari to quash orders No.DUS:158:1997-1998 dated:13.09.2004 and No.STP(A)CR:68:2010-11 dated:01.10.2012 passed by the second and first respondents vide Annexures-F and O and also the notice dated:11.10.2012 issued by the second respondent vide Annexure-Q. 3. Counsel for the respective parties urged several contentions. Heard the arguments and perused the Writ papers with care. - 3 - NC: 2025:KHC:6577 WP No. 47773 of 2012 4. The owner of the land conveyed 1730.07 Sq. Ft. of the undivided right, title, and interest in the land under a registered sale deed dated:21.11.1996. The second respondent passed the impugned order stating that the petitioners are liable to pay the stamp duty on the flat constructed by them under the Joint Development Agreement together with two car parking spaces. This is untenable. Because, what was conveyed was only 1730.07 Sq. Ft. undivided share in the land, and not the flat with two car parking spaces. 5. In the identical circumstances, the Co-ordinate bench of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.6662 & 6663/2020 vide order dated:07.03.2000 at para 8, has held as under: Para 8 : Let me now refer to another aspect. The third respondent has added the value of the building (apartment) in arriving at the market value i.e., Rs.4,67,820.00 in the first case and Rs.6,00,000.00 in the second case. The purchasers have made it clear that what they have purchased from the vendor is only an undivided share in the land; and that they got apartment constructed therein through the builder M/s. Turnkey Constructions Pvt Ltd under separate agreements and the apartment was not the subject matter of the - 4 - NC: 2025:KHC:6577 WP No. 47773 of 2012 sale. Stamp duty is leviable only in regard to what is transferred or conveyed under the deed. When the apartment was not transferred by the vendor and when the apartment is not constructed by the vendor, and when there is not even a finding that the vendor has conveyed the built area (apartment), it is ununderstandable as to how the third respondent could have included the value of the apartment for the purpose of determining the market value. The addition of the value of the building being without any factual or legal basis, are liable to be quashed." 6. The inclusion of the value of the apartment together with two car parking spaces for the purpose of determining the market value is contrary to the provisions of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. Hence, this Court deems it proper to quash Annexures-F and O. 7. The Writ of Certiorari is ordered. The order dated:13.09.2004 passed by the second respondent in No.DUS:158:1997-1998 vide Annexures-F is quashed. Consequently, the order dated:01.10.2012 passed by the first respondents in No.STP(A)CR:68:2010-11 vide Annexure-O is also quashed. - 5 - NC: 2025:KHC:6577 WP No. 47773 of 2012 8. Resultantly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/- (JYOTI MULIMANI) JUDGE MRP List No.: 2 Sl No.: 43