Thursday, April 23, 2026
Latest:
2025December 2025High CourtLatestLegalReal Estate

Bombay HC Rules – Composite Mortgage Deed for Multiple Loan Agreements Constitute Distinct Transactions for Stamp Duty

legaldeli

Four loan agreements were executed in 2017 and 2018 for Rs.625 crores to the petitioner and its group company.  In order to secure the loans, the mortgage deed was lodged for adjudication of the stamp duty under Section 31 of the Maharashtra Stamp Act, 1958.   By the interim order, the Collector of Stamps adjudicated stamp duty of Rs.10,01,100/- and it was confirmed by the order dated 11.10.2018.   Accordingly, the said stamp duty was paid and one mortgage deed dated 12.10.2018 to secure loans advanced by four loan agreements, was executed in favour of Indiabulls.

By the letter dated 27.10.2020 and as per the audit objection, the petitioner was asked to pay deficit stamp duty.  This was confirmed in the revision.

Applying the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court to the facts in hand, each of the loan instrument required execution of mortgage deed at or before the execution of the loan agreement and constituted a default in case of failure. The clear arrangement was therefore of execution of mortgage deed in respect of each individual loan instrument. If the condition would have been complied with, the Petitioner would have executed four separate mortgage deeds to secure the financial assistance availed under the four loan instruments. Despite the existence of such specific condition, the Petitioner has executed a single mortgage deed in September, 2018 which secured even the repayment of loan availed under a loan instrument executed in December, 2017. The multiple loan transactions at differing period of time for different loan amounts executed either singly with the Petitioner as the borrower or with the Petitioner as co-borrower alongwith another entity i.e. Sheth Creators Private Limited, in my view, constitutes distinct transactions and the single mortgage deed embraces four distinct transactions.

Judgment dated 23.12.2025 of the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.1395 of 2023 of Neepa Real Estate Pvt Ltd  Vs.   State of Maharashtra and others

2015 (10) SCC 700 – Chief Controlling Revenue Authority Vs. Coastal Gujarat Power Limited and others

Writ Petition No.8014 of 2019 decided on 11.9.2019 of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Navi Mumbai SEZ Pvt Ltd   vs.  State of Maharashtra

You May Also Like

Cooperative Housing Society – Membership – Auction purchasers & past dues

legaldeli

Solar Energy Trading – Peer to Peer Trading through Blockchain Technology – Revolutionary decision of the Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission

legaldeli

Bombay HC’s Big Call for Developers & Societies on TDR, FSI, DRC & Registration

legaldeli

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

I HAVE READ THE DISCLAIMER AND AGREE TO IT.

User Acknowledgement

By proceeding further and clicking on the "AGREE" button herein below, I acknowledge that I of my own accord wish to know more about LegalDeli for my own information and use. I further acknowledge that there has been no solicitation, invitation or inducement of any sort whatsoever from LegalDeli or any of its members to create an Attorney-Client relationship through this knowledge site. I further acknowledge having read and understood the Disclaimer below.

Disclaimer
About: This knowledge-site (www.LegalDeli.in) is owned and operated by LegalDeli (“NDA”), and is a resource for your informational and educational purposes only.

No Warranty: NDA does not warrant that any content or information contained on this knowledge-site is accurate, correct, complete or up-to-date, and hereby disclaims any and all liability to any person for any actual or threatened loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether such errors or omissions result from negligence, accident or otherwise. NDA assumes no liability for the interpretation and/or use of the content and/or information contained on this knowledge-site, nor does it offer any warranty of any kind, either expressed or implied in relation to such content or information.

Third-Party Links: NDA does not intend that links / URLs contained on this knowledge-site re-directing users to third party websites be considered as referrals to, endorsements of, or affiliations with any such third party website operators. NDA is not responsible for, and makes no representations or warranties, express or implied, about the content or information contained on such third party websites to which links may be provided on this knowledge-site.

No Legal Advice: By clicking ‘I agree’ and proceeding further, you acknowledge, represent and undertake that you on your own accord wish to know more about NDA, its capabilities and research content and information contained on the knowledge-site, for your own knowledge and personal use. The content and information contained on this knowledge-site should not be construed as nor relied upon as legal advice. You as a reader or recipient of content or information contained in this knowledge-site should not act, nor refrain from acting, based upon any or all of such content or information, but should always seek the advice of competent legal counsel licensed to practice the relevant law in the appropriate jurisdiction.

No Attorney-Client Relationship: This knowledge-site is not intended to be and you should not consider the content or information contained therein to be an advertisement, solicitation, inducement or invitation for an Attorney-Client relationship. Transmission, receipt or use of this knowledge-site, including content and information contained therein, does not constitute nor create an Attorney-Client relationship between NDA and you.

I Agree