CWP-5350 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Nanak Chand State of Haryana CORAM: Present: KULDEEP TIWARI 1. impugned notice dated 06.10.2025 (Annexure P Section 47 cause, as to why, the deficient stamp duty be not recovered conveyance deed executed in hi has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition. 2. also perused the record. 3. the proceedings initiated under Section 47 nothing can be deciphered from the petitioner In such a sit petition, at this stage, is nothing more than a premature motion. 4. petitioner Government of Haryana, he is not required to affix concerned, it goes without saying that the matter 5350-2026 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of decision: Nanak Chand Versus Haryana and others CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Deepak Grover, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G., Haryana. **** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (Oral) The petitioner was summoned by the impugned notice dated 06.10.2025 (Annexure P Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 cause, as to why, the deficient stamp duty be not recovered conveyance deed executed in his favour. In this backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition. This Court has heard learned counsel for the perused the record. Ex facie, the petition at hand the proceedings initiated under Section 47 nothing can be deciphered from the petitioner appeared on the date fixed or any reply has been filed by him In such a situation, this Court is of the considered opinion that the , at this stage, is nothing more than a premature motion. Insofar as the sole contention raised on behalf of the petitioner, that in view of the relevant notification(s) issued by Government of Haryana, he is not required to affix concerned, it goes without saying that the the matter, shall consider and deal therewith, before arriving at any IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-5350-2026 (O&M) Date of decision: 23.07.2026 ….Petitioner ….Respondents KULDEEP TIWARI Mr. Deepak Grover, Advocate, Mr. Vivek Chauhan, Addl. A.G., Haryana. petitioner was summoned by the Collector, Palwal, vide impugned notice dated 06.10.2025 (Annexure P-3), under Section A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short ‘the Act’), to show cause, as to why, the deficient stamp duty be not recovered as regards the . In this backdrop, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of instant writ petition. This Court has heard learned counsel for the parties, and has at hand is silent as regards the stage of the proceedings initiated under Section 47-A of the Act. So much so, nothing can be deciphered from the pleadings, as to whether, the or any reply has been filed by him. , this Court is of the considered opinion that the instant , at this stage, is nothing more than a premature motion. sole contention raised on behalf of the that in view of the relevant notification(s) issued by the Government of Haryana, he is not required to affix any stamp duty is the authority, which is seized of , shall consider and deal therewith, before arriving at any s Palwal, vide 3), under Section show as regards the . In this backdrop, the petitioner , and has is silent as regards the stage of A of the Act. So much so, the . instant sole contention raised on behalf of the the is authority, which is seized of , shall consider and deal therewith, before arriving at any AMIT KUMAR 2026.07.24 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CWP-5350 conclusion speculations this petition, at this stage, and the same is petitioner is at liberty to raise all the pleas, as before the Collector concerned. 23.07.2026 Ak Sharma 5350-2026 (O&M) -2- conclusion. Suffice it to say, the claim of the petitioner is predicated on speculations only. Therefore, this Court refrains itself from entertaining this petition, at this stage, and the same is petitioner is at liberty to raise all the pleas, as before the Collector concerned. .2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable im of the petitioner is predicated on . Therefore, this Court refrains itself from entertaining this petition, at this stage, and the same is dismissed. However, the petitioner is at liberty to raise all the pleas, as set out in the petition, (KULDEEP TIWARI) JUDGE Yes Yes/No im of the petitioner is predicated on . Therefore, this Court refrains itself from entertaining However, the petition, AMIT KUMAR 2026.07.24 15:36 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document