Four Bills tabled in assembly
The stamp duty of Rs 50 for a certain work was raised to Rs 200, and where stamp duty of Rs 1,000 was applicable, Rs 5,000 will be charged. The stamp duty in other brackets was raised likewise. The reason for the amendment states that the stamp duty imposed for different tasks like contract deeds or agreements was rationalised.
Another amendment Bill in the Indian Stamp (Madhya Pradesh) Act provides for the imposition of a 1 percent penalty on the amount less paid than stipulated as stamp duty if the person concerned pays the remaining amount.
Besides, 1 per cent interest on the amount less paid will also be charged from the day when an agreement was executed to the day when the remaining amount of stamp duty due is paid.
The amendment Bill in the Registration Act provides that the bank or financial institution, which pays debt to a person against hypothecation of property, will inform the office of the registrar when the debt is paid and the title transferred to the name of the owner, so that the latter doesn't have to go to the registrar's office to inform about the transfer of title in his name.
A Bill proposing a change in calculating the extra guarantee amount in case of a customer seeking extra power load was also presented in the House.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economic Times
23 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Insurance claims not restricted to third party in motor accidents: SC
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court held that motor vehicle insurance policy holders can claim compensation and referred the issue of claims against injury or death to the policyholder themselves in a road accident to a larger bench, saying that such cases have contradict judgements in the SC, while hearing the compensation plea of a minor girl, who lost both her parents in a car accident while her father was driving, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act could be invoked for such a claim, adding that it is a special provision which overrides not only all the provisions of the Act but also any other law in force for the time minor was provided with the compensation by the insurance company for the death of her mother but not for her father as he was himself the insured bench said: "... a claim under section 163A, as per the words employed in the provision, according to us covers every claim and is not restricted to a third party claim; without any requirement of establishing the negligence, if death or permanent disability is caused by reason of the motor accident. This would also take in the liability with respect to the death of an owner or a driver who stepped into the shoes of the owner, if the claim is made under section 163A dehors the statutory liability under section 147 or the contractual liability as reduced to writing in an insurance policy".The insurance company, however, had held that the petitioner, having succeeded to the estate of the owner of the vehicle who died in the accident cannot at the same time be the person who has the liability and is the recipient of the compensation."It would override the provisions under sections 147 & 149 along with the other provisions of the Act and the law regulating insurance as also the terms of the policy confining the claim with respect to an owner-driver to a fixed sum. This according to us is the intention of incorporating the non-obstante clause under Section 163A providing for no-fault liability claims , the compensation for which is restricted to the structured formula under the IInd Schedule. It is a beneficial piece of legislation brought in, keeping in mind the enhanced chances of an accident, resulting from the prevalence of vehicles in the overcrowded roads of today. It was a social security scheme, brought about considering the need for a more comprehensive scheme of 'no-fault' liability for reasons of the ever-increasing instances of motor vehicle accidents and the difficulty in proving rash and negligent driving," the bench said.(With TOI inputs)
Hindustan Times
26 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
J&K govt takes over historic Nedou's Hotel in Gulmarg
The Jammu and Kashmir administration has taken possession of the 137-year-old Nedou's Hotel, owned by a relative of chief minister Omar Abdullah, in Gulmarg after it was served an eviction notice for occupying 98 kanals and 11 marlas of government land without a valid lease since 1985. The Jammu and Kashmir administration has taken possession of the 137-year-old Nedou's Hotel, owned by a relative of chief minister Omar Abdullah, in Gulmarg after it was served an eviction notice for occupying 98 kanals and 11 marlas of government land without a valid lease since 1985. (File photo) The iconic hotel, Kashmir's oldest since it was established in 1888 by European entrepreneur Michael Adam Nedou as a retreat for colonial officers and visiting dignitaries, was sealed and taken over by the Gulmarg Development Authority (GDA) on Monday. The hotel's original lease for two kanals and 13 marlas had expired in 1985, while it was occupying land measuring 98 kanals and 11 marlas illegally. The proprietor, Omar K Nedou, is the maternal cousin of National Conference patriarch Farooq Abdullah, the father of chief minister Omar Abdullah. The action was carried out under the Jammu and Kashmir Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1988, in compliance with orders issued by both the Supreme Court and the high court. The Jammu and Kashmir government had rejected the hotel's request for a renewal of lease in 2015 owing to illegal occupation of over 90 kanals, followed by the dismissal of the special leave petition by the Supreme Court and the high court of Jammu and Kashmir's order on September 6, 2018. The assistant director of tourism, acting as the designated estate officer, oversaw the eviction and transfer of the premises to the GDA in the presence of the local magistrate and police. 'The premises had been vacated by the occupants at the time of execution and the possession was duly taken over as per the law,' the official informed the GDA. On August 2, the GDA's chief executive officer had instructed the tourism department to carry out the eviction within 24 hours. 'It has been found necessary to take possession of the said property in light of legal directions and examination of records,' the letter said. Michael Adam Nedou's son Harry Nedou had married a tribal Gujjar woman from Gulmarg and their daughter Akbar Jahan later married National Conference founder Sheikh Muhammad Abdullah, the grandfather of Omar Abdullah. The hotel was in the news in March when a fashion show was held on its premises during the holy month of Ramzan. The CM had distanced himself from the event as opposition parties and religious leaders slammed it for being 'obscene and inappropriate'. Omar Abdullah said it was a private event and his government had no role in organising it.
Time of India
26 minutes ago
- Time of India
Insurance claims not restricted to third party in motor accidents: SC
Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads The Supreme Court held that motor vehicle insurance policy holders can claim compensation and referred the issue of claims against injury or death to the policyholder themselves in a road accident to a larger bench, saying that such cases have contradict judgements in the SC, while hearing the compensation plea of a minor girl, who lost both her parents in a car accident while her father was driving, a bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K Vinod Chandran said section 163A of the Motor Vehicles Act could be invoked for such a claim, adding that it is a special provision which overrides not only all the provisions of the Act but also any other law in force for the time minor was provided with the compensation by the insurance company for the death of her mother but not for her father as he was himself the insured bench said: "... a claim under section 163A, as per the words employed in the provision, according to us covers every claim and is not restricted to a third party claim; without any requirement of establishing the negligence, if death or permanent disability is caused by reason of the motor accident. This would also take in the liability with respect to the death of an owner or a driver who stepped into the shoes of the owner, if the claim is made under section 163A dehors the statutory liability under section 147 or the contractual liability as reduced to writing in an insurance policy".The insurance company, however, had held that the petitioner, having succeeded to the estate of the owner of the vehicle who died in the accident cannot at the same time be the person who has the liability and is the recipient of the compensation."It would override the provisions under sections 147 & 149 along with the other provisions of the Act and the law regulating insurance as also the terms of the policy confining the claim with respect to an owner-driver to a fixed sum. This according to us is the intention of incorporating the non-obstante clause under Section 163A providing for no-fault liability claims , the compensation for which is restricted to the structured formula under the IInd Schedule. It is a beneficial piece of legislation brought in, keeping in mind the enhanced chances of an accident, resulting from the prevalence of vehicles in the overcrowded roads of today. It was a social security scheme, brought about considering the need for a more comprehensive scheme of 'no-fault' liability for reasons of the ever-increasing instances of motor vehicle accidents and the difficulty in proving rash and negligent driving," the bench said.(With TOI inputs)
