In the matter of Kumar Raunak and others versus State of Haryana and another CWP-20382-2018 The petitioners who are sole proprietor(s)/ proprietorship , therefore, submitted an application for the registration as Real Estate agents to the Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority along with a Fees of 25,000/- which was the requisite registration fee as applicable to individuals under Rule 9 (2) of the 2017 Haryana Rules.
The petitioners were issued the Registration Certificates as per law, valid for a period of 05 years. The petitioners, however, were served with letters by Haryana Real Estate Regulatory Authority, wherein it was submitted that the petitioners, having applied as a proprietorship concern, were required to submit the fee as applicable to the categories “other than individual” i.e. a sum of Rs. 2,50,000/- instead of Rs. 25,000/-.
A Demand for the deficient amount of Rs. 2,25,000/- was thus raised from the petitioners to be deposited within a period of 15 days failing which their license was threatened to be revoked.The period for depositing the amount was thereafter extended by the respondents vide public notice dated 18.05.2018 mandating the sole
proprietors to convert their registration certificates in the name of their respective proprietorship concerns on payment of the charges applicable to the entities “other than individuals”
The Court opined that Ordinarily understood, sole proprietorship is an unincorporated business that is just one owner by himself or herself. Creation of a separate business or a trade name is not necessary or a prerequisite in a sole proprietorship/sole proprietory business module and even if a separate business name is used for carrying on the business, the same by itself does not give any separate juristic entity or legal existence to the proprietary name separate and distinct from the owner.
The Court further opined that It is a well settled position in law that a proprietary concern and the proprietor are one and the same and that they cannot be treated as separate juristic entities and the petitioners as sole proprietors cannot be treated as an entity “other than individual”
