SURESH RAMCHANDRA SANCHETI AND ANR vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE DEPT OF REVENUE AND ORS

Judgment text excerpt

WP.8365.2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8365 OF 2024 1. Suresh Ramchandra Sancheti & Anr. 2. Mrs. Sunita Suresh Sancheti ….Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Department of Revenue, 2. The Controller of Stamps, 3. The Additional Controller of Stamps, 4. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, and Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration. ….Respondents Mr. S. R. Nargolkar a/w Mr. Arjun Kadam & Ms. Neeta Patil, Adv. for Petitioners. Mr. Y. D. Patil, AGP for Respondent-State. CORAM : SOMASEKHAR SUNDARESAN, J. RESERVED ON : DECEMBER 8, 2025 PRONOUNCED ON : DECEMBER 12, 2025 JUDGEMENT: Context and Factual Background: 1. Whether the extraordinary writ jurisdiction can be invoked to seek a direction of a refund of stamp duty paid with the intention of being impressed on an instrument that was never executed, is the question that has arisen in this Writ Petition. Digitally signed by AARTI AARTI GAJANAN GAJANAN PALKAR PALKAR Date: 2025.12.12 Page 1 of 31 16:21:04 DECEMBER 12, 2025 +0530 Aarti Palkar WP.8365.2024.doc 2. The facts of the case fall in a very narrow compass. The Petitioner No. 1, Suresh Ratanchand Sancheti (“ Suresh”) is the designated guardian of his wife, Petitioner No. 2, Sunita Suresh Sancheti (“Sunita”). Suresh was appointed as the legal guardian of Sunita in 2019 pursuant to a guardianship petition filed in connection with Sunita having suffered a 100% locomotor and mental disability arising out of an aneurysmal stroke suffered in 2017. 3. Suresh finalised an agreement for sale with his neighbour for purchase of a flat in the same building, sometime in July 2019. Towards this end, an amount of Rs. 10.80 lakh was paid into the treasury for the purchase of s