The Supreme Court on Monday stepped in to resolve a narrow but long-pending dispute over non-judicial stamp papers, directing the State of Uttar Pradesh to refund ₹3.99 lakh to a homebuyer while closing contempt proceedings against the Agra Development Authority (ADA).
The order came in contempt petitions filed by Dharmendra Sharma, who alleged incomplete compliance with the Court’s earlier judgment in his property dispute with ADA.
The Bench, led by Justice Vikram Nath andJustice Sandeep Mehta, delivered a short but decisive ruling, bringing the matter to a close.
Background of the Case
The contempt petitions arose from a September 6, 2024 judgment of the Supreme Court of India, which had ruled in favour of the petitioner after finding faults on both sides in a housing dispute involving ADA.
In that judgment, the Court ordered:
- Refund of the entire amount deposited by the buyer with 9% annual interest
- Additional compensation of ₹15 lakh
- Return of unused non-judicial stamp papers worth ₹3,99,100
While ADA refunded the money and paid compensation, the problem surfaced when it returned the physical stamp papers in December 2024. By then, the stamps had expired.
When the petitioner approached the Stamp and Registration Department for a refund, the authorities rejected his request, citing limitation under the Uttar Pradesh Stamp Rules.
Why the Contempt Petition Was Filed
According to the petitioner, returning expired stamp papers instead of refunding their value amounted to non-compliance with the Supreme Court’s directions.
Read also:- Supreme Court Bars Customs Duty on SEZ Power Supply, Orders Refund to Adani Power for 2010–16 Period
The Stamp Department, however, took the position that:
- Physical stamp papers can only be refunded within eight years of purchase
- The petitioner had applied nearly ten years later
- The Supreme Court judgment did not explicitly direct the Registration Department to refund stamp value
An order dated July 21, 2025 formally rejected the refund request, pushing the petitioner to move the Supreme Court again through contempt proceedings.
Court’s Observations
During the hearing, the State of Uttar Pradesh was impleaded as a party. In its affidavit, the State acknowledged that its officers had acted on a bona fide interpretation of Rule 218 of the U.P. Stamp Rules, 1942.
Read also:- Delhi Riots Case: Supreme Court Refuses Bail, Says Long Jail Term Alone Can’t Override UAPA Bar
Significantly, the State tendered an unconditional apology and assured the Court of its willingness to comply with any direction issued in the interest of justice.
“The action was taken on a bona fide understanding of the rule,” the Bench recorded, noting the State’s stand.
The Court made it clear that it would not reopen the merits of the original civil appeals but would focus only on ensuring compliance in the peculiar factual situation.
Final Decision
Without holding any official guilty of contempt, the Supreme Court issued a simple and clear direction.
The Bench ordered the State of Uttar Pradesh to refund ₹3,99,100 to the petitioner within two months, subject to the return of the physical stamp papers received earlier from ADA.
With this direction:
- Contempt proceedings against ADA were formally closed
- All pending applications were disposed of
The judgment was pronounced on January 5, 2026, bringing an end to the litigation chain that followed the original housing dispute.
Case Title: Dharmendra Sharma v. M. Arunmozhi & Another
Case Number: Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 703–704 of 2025
