In Brief
A citizen purchased stamp paper to facilitate a real estate transaction but the deal fell through due to a dispute with the builder. The applicant pursued a consumer complaint before the NCDRC, which was decided in his favour with a refund option. When he applied for refund of stamp duty two months after the NCDRC order (but more than six months after stamp purchase), the revenue authority rejected it citing a six-month limitation in the Stamp Act. The Supreme Court held that the limitation period applies only to specific categories of cases under the Act; the applicant's case—a bona fide purchase rendered unnecessary by litigation—fell outside these categories. Using Article 142, the Court permitted the refund with interest, holding that judicial delay should not prejudice a litigant who diligently pursued their rights through court proceedings.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.