APHC010030282025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH (Special Original Jurisdiction) FRIDAY, THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA WRIT Between: 1. CHAKRAVARTHI VEMULA, S/O. SWAMULU VEMULA, AGE 46 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. A211, SUBHODAYA LUXURIA APARTMENTS, PANATHURU NEAR GOVT SCHOOL, PANATHURU, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA. 1. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI. 2. THE COMMISSIONER AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. 3. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, NARASARAOPET, PALANADU DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB REGISTER, CHILAKALURIPETA, PAIANADU DISTRICT. 5. THE BANK OF BARODA, REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, REGIONAL ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH D.NO. 54 COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR. FLAT NO. 301 AND 302 SRINIVASANAGAR BANK COLONY, OPP NTR NTR DISTRICT. Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MARELLA RADHA IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO: 1701/2025 CHAKRAVARTHI VEMULA, S/O. SWAMULU VEMULA, AGE 46 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. A211, SUBHODAYA LUXURIA APARTMENTS, PANATHURU NEAR GOVT SCHOOL, PANATHURU, BENGALURU, KARNATAKA. ...PETITIONER AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH, STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT BUILDINGS, VELAGAPUDI. THE COMMISSIONER AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, NARASARAOPET, PALANADU THE SUB REGISTER, CHILAKALURIPETA, PAIANADU DISTRICT. THE BANK OF BARODA, REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, REGIONAL ASSETS RECOVERY BRANCH D.NO. 54-15-5, FLOOR. FLAT NO. 301 AND 302 SRINIVASANAGAR BANK COLONY, OPP NTR HEALTH UNIVERSITY, VIJAYAWADA, ...RESPONDENT(S): Counsel for the Petitioner: IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3328] THE TWENTY FOURTH DAY OF JANUARY THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA CHAKRAVARTHI VEMULA, S/O. SWAMULU VEMULA, AGE 46 YEARS, R/O. FLAT NO. A211, SUBHODAYA LUXURIA APARTMENTS, PANATHURU NEAR GOVT SCHOOL, PANATHURU, ...PETITIONER STAMPS AND REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, THE COMMISSIONER AND INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION AND STAMPS, VIJAYAWADA, NTR DISTRICT. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, NARASARAOPET, PALANADU THE SUB REGISTER, CHILAKALURIPETA, PAIANADU DISTRICT. THE BANK OF BARODA, REP BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER, 5, DHOOM FLOOR. FLAT NO. 301 AND 302 SRINIVASANAGAR HEALTH UNIVERSITY, VIJAYAWADA, ...RESPONDENT(S): 2 Counsel for the Respondent(S): 1. GP FOR REGISTRATION AND STAMPS The Court made the following: ORAL ORDER: Heard Smt. Marella Radha, learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri K. Arjun Chowdhary, learned Assistant Government for Stamps & Registration appearing for all the Respondents 2. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under: “It is prayed that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue an appropriate writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of Writ of Mandamus declaring the inaction of the 2 to 4th Respondents to receive and register the Sale Certificate dated 8.1.2025 issued by the 5th respondent in respect of the schedule property admeasuring 968 Sq.yards or extent of 20 cents site consisting Godown Near D.No. 13-52, Nadendia Grama D.No. 637/D, Nadendia Village, Palanadu District insisting payment of stamp duty calculated on the basis of present market value instead of calculating the stamp duty on the basis of sale consideration mentioned in the sale certificate as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional besides contrary to the settled law enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and this Honble Court and consequently direct the 4th respondent to receive and register the Sale Certificate dated 8.1.2025 issued by the 5th respondent thereby collecting stamp duty calculated on the sale consideration mentioned in the said sale certificate and pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 3. The facts, as stated in the Affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, are that the Regional Assets Recovery Branch of Bank of Baroda initiated the Proceedings under the provisions of Securitization and Re-construction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI 3 Act) for recovery of the dues from the borrower and issued e-Auction Notice for the sale of subject property indicating that the e-Auction would be conducted on 24.12.2024; that on the scheduled date of e-Auction i.e., on 24.12.2024, the Writ Petitioner herein had participated and was declared as successful bidder for an amount of Rs.27,25,000/-; that the Writ Petitioner had paid the 25% of the sale amount being a sum of Rs.6,81,250/- on the same date; that the Writ Petitioner has also complied with all the other conditions and had thereafter paid the entire auction amount to Bank of Baroda, Vijayawada and have obtained the Sale Certificate on 08.01.2025; that the Respondent No.5 (Bank of Baroda) had delivered possession of the subject property to the Writ Petitioner; that the Writ Petitioner approached the Sub- Registrar, Chilakaluripeta (Respondent No.4) for registration of the Sale Certificate; whereas, the Respondent No.4 directed the Writ Petitioner to pay the stamp duty on the market value of the subject property; that the Respondent No.4 had stated that the registration will not be permissible unless the stamp duty is paid on the market value of the property and not on the auction value. 4. Having been aggrieved of the stand taken by the Respondent No.4 to the effect that the registration would be permitted only if the Stamp Duty is paid on the market value but not as per the Sale Certificate issued by the Bank of Baroda (i.e., on ₹ 27,25,000/-), the present Writ Petition is filed. 5. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner would submit that though the law is well settled on this issue, it is legally untenable on the part of the 4 Respondent No.4 to insist for the payment of stamp duty on the market value instead of the amount fetched in the auction sale. 6. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has placed reliance on a Judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Hon’ble Court in State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary and Ors.Vs. Marvel Financial Services Ltd., rep. by its Director Mr. P. Srinivas Chowdary and Anr. : 2022 SCC Online AP 3328. 7. Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner has also placed reliance on the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.298 of 2025, dated 20.01.2025, wherein this Court has elaborately considered various decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, the Division Bench of this Court and also the learned Single Judge. Since the facts involved in the present Writ Petition are identical to that of the facts in W.P.No.298 of 2025, dated 20.01.2025, the present Writ Petition is allowed, following the dictum of this Court in W.P.No.298 of 2025, dated 20.01.2025. 8. The Official Respondent No.4 is directed to register the Sale Certificate of the Writ Petitioners in accordance with law by fixing Stamp Duty on the value shown in the Sale Certificate i.e., Rs.27,25,000/- and the Registration charges as applicable. No order as to costs. 9. Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand closed in terms of this order. ______________________________________ GANNAMANENI RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J Dt: 24.01.2025 DSV