Court No. - 33 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 50562 of 2009 Petitioner :- Triloki Nath Pathak Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- S.K. Chaubey,S.K. Dubey Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 28.4.2008 and the appellate order
dated 15.6.2009 passed in proceedings under the Indian Stamp Act for
determination of deficiency in stamp duty.
The dispute relates to a sale deed concerning Arazi No.140 area 0.1 hectare.
The petitioner has valued the aforesaid land as agricultural land and paid
stamp duty accordingly. On the document being presented for registration the
Sub-Registrar made a report that the aforesaid Arazi has been notified as
residential and therefore stamp duty on agricultural rate has wrongly been
paid. On the said report proceedings under Section 47-A of the Act were
drawn and after notice to the petitioner, impugned order dated 28.4.2008 was
passed. The Assistant Collector Stamp by applying the circle rate notified for
residential area determined the market value and the deficiency of Rs.21,280/-
which was directed to be paid with interest at the rate of 1.5% per month. The
said order has been upheld in appeal also.
As the pleadings are complete, the petition has been heard finally with the
consent of counsel for the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order was
passed ex-parte without allowing the petitioner any opportunity to adduce
evidence. Secondly, it has been submitted that the land in dispute is recorded
as agricultural land in revenue record. The relevant Khasra and Khatauni in
this regard has been placed on record through rejoinder affidavit. However, it
has not been disputed that the Collector has notified the aforesaid land to be
of residential use.
The circle rate notified by the Collector is merely a guideline and is a piece of
evidence but it cannot always be a conclusive prove of the fact with regard to
the nature of the land or its market value. In such circumstances, it is always
open for the parties to prove actual nature of the land and the market value by
leading evidence. Such opportunity has been denied to the petitioner in the
present case.
The Assistant Collector Stamp had passed an order on 10.8.2007 directing the
Tehsildar to submit a report with regard to the nature of land after due
inspection but without waiting for any such report, the impugned order
treating the land to be of residential nature has been passed.
Apart from the above, revenue entries were also not considered.
In view of aforesaid the impugned orders are not sustainable in law.
Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 28.4.2008 (Annexure – 5) and
15.6.2009 (Annexure – 7) are quashed and the matter is remitted to the
Assistant Commissioner, Stamp, respondent no.2 for redetermining the nature
of the land and its market value after giving opportunity to the petitioner for
adducing evidence in accordance with law. The Assistant Commissioner,
Stamp shall decide the matter again within a period of three months.
The petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 22.7.2010
BK