Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Saryu Properties and Hotels Pvt. Ltd., a company engaged in hospitality business owning two hotels in Mumbai, filed a writ petition challenging the order dated 14.7.2014 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune (respondent no.1) in Appeal No. 24 of 2014. The petitioner had earlier filed an appeal before respondent no.1 challenging only the part of the order dated 24.12.2013 passed by the Collector of Stamps, Kurla (respondent no.2) in Adjudication Case No. 1206 of 2013/K which was against it. While deciding the appeal, respondent no.1 not only upheld the part adverse to the petitioner but also, without affording any opportunity of hearing and without any argument from respondent no.2, set aside that part of the Collector's order which was in favour of the petitioner and which had not been challenged by any person. The petitioner contended that respondent no.1 exceeded its appellate jurisdiction under Section 53(1A) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 by setting aside an unchallenged part of the order that was favourable to the petitioner. The High Court held that the appellate authority's jurisdiction is limited to the subject matter of the appeal and it cannot suo motu set aside a part of the order not under challenge, especially without hearing the appellant. The court quashed the impugned order dated 14.7.2014 and remanded the appeal back to respondent no.1 for fresh consideration in accordance with law, after hearing the parties.
Headnote
A) Stamp Act - Appellate Jurisdiction - Scope of Appeal - Section 53(1A) Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 - The appellate authority under Section 53(1A) cannot suo motu set aside or modify that part of the Collector's order which was not challenged by any party and was in favour of the appellant, as the jurisdiction is confined to the subject matter of the appeal. Doing so without hearing the appellant violates principles of natural justice. (Paras 2-5)
B) Natural Justice - Right to Hearing - Appellate Proceedings - The appellate authority must afford an opportunity of hearing to the appellant before passing an order adverse to his interest, especially when setting aside a favourable part of the original order that was not under challenge. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, while exercising appellate jurisdiction under Section 53(1A) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, can set aside that part of the Collector's order which was in favour of the appellant and not challenged by any party, without affording an opportunity of hearing.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 14.7.2014 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune in Appeal No. 24 of 2014 is quashed and set aside. The appeal is remanded back to respondent no.1 for fresh consideration in accordance with law, after hearing the parties. The writ petition is allowed.
Law Points
- Appellate authority cannot suo motu set aside part of order not challenged
- Natural justice requires hearing before adverse order
- Section 53(1A) Maharashtra Stamp Act limits appellate jurisdiction to subject matter of appeal
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (01) 47
Writ Petition No. 7279 of 2014
Shantanu Kemkar, Prakash D. Naik
Mr. Vishal Kanade a/w Mr. Kingshuk Banerjee and Mr. Dhru Joshi i/by M/s. Wadia Ghandy & Co. for the petitioner; Mr. Vikas Mali, AGP for the respondent State
Saryu Properties and Hotels Pvt. Ltd.
Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Maharashtra State, Pune & Collector of Stamps, Kurla
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging appellate order under Maharashtra Stamp Act
Remedy Sought
Quashment of order dated 14.7.2014 passed by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority in Appeal No. 24 of 2014
Filing Reason
Appellate authority set aside part of Collector's order in favour of petitioner without hearing and without challenge
Previous Decisions
Collector of Stamps passed order dated 24.12.2013 in Adjudication Case No. 1206 of 2013/K; petitioner appealed only against adverse part; respondent no.1 passed order dated 14.7.2014 setting aside favourable part also
Issues
Whether the appellate authority under Section 53(1A) of Maharashtra Stamp Act can set aside an unchallenged part of the original order in favour of the appellant without hearing?
Whether the appellate order dated 14.7.2014 is liable to be quashed for exceeding jurisdiction and violating natural justice?
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that respondent no.1 exceeded its appellate jurisdiction by setting aside the part of Collector's order which was in favour of petitioner and not challenged by any party, without affording opportunity of hearing.
Respondent State argued through AGP but no specific submissions recorded in judgment.
Ratio Decidendi
The appellate authority under Section 53(1A) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958 cannot suo motu set aside or modify that part of the Collector's order which was not challenged by any party and was in favour of the appellant, as its jurisdiction is confined to the subject matter of the appeal. Doing so without hearing the appellant violates principles of natural justice.
Judgment Excerpts
While deciding the said appeal, the respondent no.1 not only maintained the part of the order which was against the petitioner but without affording any opportunity of hearing and without there being argument raised by respondent no.2 who was respondent in the said appeal, has set aside that part of the order passed by the respondent no.2 which was in favour of the petitioner and which was not challenged by any person.
Thus according to the petitioner, while exercising the appellate jurisdiction conferred upon it under section 53(1A) of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958, respondent no.1 by exceeding the jurisdiction had set aside that part of the order which was in favour of the petitioner and against which no appeal was preferred by any person.
Procedural History
Collector of Stamps passed order dated 24.12.2013 in Adjudication Case No. 1206 of 2013/K. Petitioner filed Appeal No. 24 of 2014 before Chief Controlling Revenue Authority challenging only the adverse part. Respondent no.1 passed order dated 14.7.2014 setting aside the favourable part also. Petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 7279 of 2014 in Bombay High Court challenging the appellate order.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958: Section 53(1A)
