| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 676 2007 SLD 676 2007 PLD 490 |
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.1359 of 2007, decision dated: 14-03-2007
NASIM SIKANDAR, J
Muhammad Akram Javed for Petitioner. Rafey Ahmad Khan, A.A.G. Aamir Ali Chisty, Deputy District Officer (Revenue), Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.1359 of 2007, decision dated: 14-03-2007
NASIM SIKANDAR, J
Muhammad Akram Javed for Petitioner. Rafey Ahmad Khan, A.A.G. Aamir Ali Chisty, Deputy District Officer (Revenue), Lahore High Court
MUHAMMAD HAMEED
VS
DISTRICT OFFICER (REVENUE), Lahore High Court and another
Law: Punjab Finance Act, 1989
Section: 7,7(2)
Law: Punjab Finance Act, 1989
Section: 7,7(2)
Law: Punjab Registration Rules, 1929
Section: 137
Law: Punjab Finance Act, 2006
Section: 15
Registration Act (XVI of 1908)--- ----Ss. 17 & 60---Punjab Registration Rules, 1929, R.137---Punjab Finance Act (V of 1989), S.7 [as amended by S.15 of Punjab Finance Act (III of 2006)]---Transfer of Property Act (IV of 1882), S.54---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Levy of Capital Value Tax---Registration of document---Verification of ownership---Non-issuance of certificate of registration---Sale transaction---Scope---Petitioner purchased a property and Local Commissioner, after completing the sale-deed, presented it to Sub-Registrar on 23-6-2006, for registration---Sub-Registrar refused to accept the document on the ground that it was not supported with any documentary proof of ownership of seller, therefore, in view of R.137 of Punjab Registration Rules, 1929, the registration was deferred to make up the flaw, whereafter Capital Value Tax would be imposed upon petitioner---Validity---Registration Act, 1908, did not empower Sub-Registrar to probe into ownership of property which was subject matter of sale transaction---Even if probing or verification of ownership was to be made, it should have been made before asking the seller to put his signatures to authenticate transaction both directly or through a Local Commissioner---Sale transaction, in case it was brought into black and white was complete when it was confirmed by parties---Transaction was complete when seller put his signatures and thumb-impressions on the document in presence of witnesses and also Local Commissioner appointed by Sub-Registrar---Seller having accepted receipt of consideration, the purchase or acquisition of title by petitioner as purchaser was complete---Since amendment in S.7 of Finance Act, 1989, by way of S.15 of Finance Act, 2006, providing for levy on such like transaction came into effect on 1-7-2006, it was past and closed transaction as far the levy was concerned---Sale deed in, question could not be brought to levy merely for the reason that its registration, for any reason whatsoever took place or was to be made after 1-7-2006---Petitioner having presented the document well before the date of levy viz. 1-7-2006, he could not be held…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492