Civil Revision No. 1941 of 2003 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Civil Revision No. 1941 of 2003
Date of Decision: 23.11.2009
Satish Chand and others ......Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana .......Respondents
CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT GUPTA.
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the
judgment?
2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Shri C.B. Goel, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Shri Lokesh Sinhal, Additional AG, Haryana.
HEMANT GUPTA, J. (Oral).
Challenge in the present revision petition is to the order
passed by the learned Collector on 28.2.2002 and the order in appeal
dated 7.11.2002 passed by the Commissioner, in the proceedings under
Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [ for short `the Act’ ].
The present petitioner, on the basis of an instrument of sale
dated 27.9.2001, purchased land measuring 61 kanals 11 marlas at the
stated value of Rs.1,70,000/- per acre, total amounting to
Rs.13,08,000/-. The petitioner was served with a show cause notice on
the ground that the instrument of sale is undervalued for the purpose of
stamp duty as the market price of the land is Rs.5 lacs per acre upto the
Civil Revision No. 1941 of 2003 [2]
depth of one killa beyond the road, as per the Collector’s rate fixed. On
the basis of the said fact, the Collector found that the value of the
property sold by the instrument of sale Rs.24,19,375/- and that the
petitioner is to make up the deficiency on the stamp duty amounting to
Rs.1,38,925/-. The said order was affirmed in appeal by the
Commissioner. It is the said orders, which are under challenge in the
present petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the
Collector has found the instrument of sale undervalued relying upon
the Collector’s rate. Still further, it was found that the sale deed has
been executed on the basis of an agreement to sell allegedly of the year
1998. Therefore, the price agreed in the aforesaid agreement cannot be
made basis of the sale consideration of the sale deed executed in the
year 2001.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others
v. Mohabir Singh and others, (1996)1 Supreme Court Cases 609 and
this Court in Gauri Singla v. State of Haryana and others, 2008(4) PLR
524, have held that the Collector’s rate cannot be made basis for
determining the sale consideration recited in an instrument of sale. It
was held that such Collector’s rate has no statutory recognition and,
therefore, determination of the market value on the basis of Collector’s
rate is not sustainable.
In view of the aforesaid judgments, the orders passed by the
Authorities under the Act, holding that the instrument of sale is
Civil Revision No. 1941 of 2003 [3]
undervalued for the purposes of stamp duty, are clearly not sustainable.
There is no other evidence of the market value of the land conveyed in
the year 2001.
Hence, the present revision petition is allowed. The
impugned orders are set aside. The matter is remitted back to the
Collector for re-determination of the deficient stamp duty, if any, on
the basis of the market value of the land subject matter of instrument of
sale.
Parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear before
the learned Collector on 21.12.2009, for further proceedings, in
accordance with law.
[ HEMANT GUPTA ]
JUDGE
23-11-2009
ds