Ms Vayuu Propmart Pvt Ltd v. State Of Haryana And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision : July 02, 2026 M/S VAYUU PROPMART PVT. LTD.

-PETITIONER V/S STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS -RESPONDENTS

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI

Present:

Mr. Anuj Dewan, Advocate for the petitioner.

Dr. Neha Awasthi, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

*** KULDEEP TIWARI, J. (ORAL) 1.

The relief sought in the instant writ petition is for issuance of directions to the respondents to refund a sum of ₹3,16,35,020/-, being the amount deposited by the petitioner towards stamp duty and registration charges on 11.10.2023 through the e-GRAS portal vide GRN Nos. 0108255490, 0108255298, 0108255801 and 0108255632. 2.

It is averred in the writ petition that the petitioner participated in an e-auction conducted by Punjab & Sind Bank on 29.09.2023 in respect of two parcels of immovable property situated at Village Daulatabad, Tehsil and District Gurugram. The petitioner, having emerged as the highest bidder, was issued a Sale Confirmation Letter dated 09.10.2023. Thereafter, the petitioner deposited the entire sale consideration, pursuant to which Sale Certificates dated 10.10.2023 were issued in its favour in respect of the aforesaid properties. In furtherance thereof, and with a view to execution and registration of the conveyance deeds, the petitioner paid the requisite

stamp duty and registration charges through the e-GRAS portal of the Directorate of Treasuries and Accounts, Haryana, on 11.10.2023. However, in the meantime the mortgagors/original owners of the properties preferred review applications before the Debts Recovery Tribunal-I, New Delhi. Consequently, vide order dated 27.10.2023, the Tribunal restrained the Bank from executing the conveyance/sale deeds in respect of the said properties. As a result, the e-challans/stamp papers purchased by the petitioner remained unutilized. The petitioner, therefore, claimed a refund of the stamp duty and registration charges in terms of the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act by submitting a representation dated 14.04.2026 (Annexure P-2), which has not yet been decided. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to refund the stamp duty and registration charges. 3.

During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that, at this stage, the petitioner would be satisfied in case a direction is issued to the competent authority, amongst the respondents, to decide the representation (Annexure P-2) within a stipulated time period.

4.

Learned State counsel, who is in receipt of an advance copy of the writ petition and represents the respondents, submits that she has no objection to the issuance of a direction to the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation within a time-bound period. 5.

In view of the above, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case or the petitioner's claim, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the competent authority, amongst the

respondents, to take a final decision on the petitioner's representation (Annexure P-2), in accordance with law, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. In the event the petitioner is found entitled to refund of the stamp duty and registration charges, the same shall be forthwith released in its favour.

6.

Liberty is also reserved to the petitioner to seek revival of the instant writ petition in the event the authority concerned fails to comply with the directions issued hereinabove.

(KULDEEP TIWARI) July 02, 2026 JUDGE devinder Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether Reportable :

Yes/No