Hella Infra Market PVT. LTD. vs. State Of Maharashtra Through The Prin. Secretary, Revenue And Forest Dept. And Ors

Held

The Court held that the contentions raised by respondent no. 6 regarding the validity of the Sale Certificate and the sale price are not within the scope of the present writ petition. These matters are subject to adjudication before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). The Court noted that the Sale Certificate remains valid and subsisting, with no stay order in effect. Crucially, the Court found that the sole impediment to the registration of the Sale Certificate, which was the charge of the Sales Tax Department as indicated by mutation entry no. 751, has been removed. This was confirmed by the learned counsel for the State, who did not dispute the deletion of the mutation entry and the consequent removal of the embargo. Therefore, the Court directed the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Wada, to register the Sale Certificate and the Deed of Confirmation. The Court explicitly stated that the contentions of respondent no. 6 and other parties are kept open to be asserted in appropriate proceedings, including the pending DRT proceedings. The DRT is to decide the case independently without being influenced by any observations made in this order, as the present proceedings only dealt with the issue of document registration.

Facts

The petitioner, Hella Infra Market Pvt. Ltd., participated in an e-auction conducted by State Bank of India under the SARFAESI Act and was the highest bidder for a property. A Sale Certificate was issued on December 23, 2022, after payment of Rs. 2,88,00,000/-. The petitioner paid the adjudicated stamp duty and penalty of Rs. 55,83,800/- and Rs. 2,23,400/- respectively. However, when approaching the Sub-Registrar of Assurances, Wada, for registration of the Sale Certificate and Deed of Confirmation, the petitioner was informed that registration could not proceed due to a charge of the Sales Tax Department (now GST) over the property, evidenced by mutation entry no. 751. This entry indicated a charge of Rs. 6,48,12,732/- by the Deputy Commissioner of State Tax, E002 GST Office, Palghar, against the original owners, Shree Vaishnav Alloys Pvt. Ltd. (respondent no. 6).

Key Issues

1. Whether the Sub-Registrar of Assurances can be directed to register the Sale Certificate and Deed of Confirmation dated 29 November, 2023, in favour of the petitioner, given the previously recorded charge of the Sales Tax Department. Petitioner's contention: The petitioner argued that the impediment to registration, namely mutation entry no. 751 reflecting a charge by the Sales Tax Department, has been removed as the dues have been cleared by respondent no. 6, and the mutation entry has been deleted. Therefore, there is no longer any hurdle to registration. Revenue's contention: The State (respondents 1-3) did not dispute that the deletion of the mutation entry would remove the embargo on registration. Respondent no. 6's contention: Respondent no. 6 opposed the petitioner's prayer, arguing that the petitioner should not benefit from the payment made by respondent no. 6 to clear the sales tax dues. However, respondent no. 6 conceded that the Sale Certificate has not been set aside or stayed and acknowledged that their challenge to the Sale Certificate is pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) on the grounds of the property being sold at a disproportionately low price.