Allahabad High Court
Smt. Jai Devi vs State Of U.P. & Others on 24 September, 2012
Bench: Sibghat Ullah Khan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Court No. - 58
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 42174 of 1998
Petitioner :- Smt. Jai Devi
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others
Petitioner Counsel :- A. Kumar Singh
Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned standing counsel for the respondents.
This writ petition arises out of proceedings for determination of deficiency in stamp duty under Section 47-A of Stamp Act. The first order challenged through this writ petition was passed on 28.2.1996 in case no.54/252 under Section 33/47-A Indian Stamp Act Banwari Lal vs. Jai Devi and others by Additional District Magistrate (Finance & Revenue), Etah. The matter related to the sale deed dated 6.6.1994 in respect of agricultural land admeasuring 0.32 acres (1/3rd part of plot no.150 total area 0.96 acres). The land (0.32 acres) was purchased by three persons jointly. In the order dated 28.2.1996 it was mentioned that as three persons had purchased hence the share of each was about 0.11 acre hence it must be treated to be abadi land and stamp duty should have been paid according to circle rate for the abadi i.e. Rs.600 per sq. meter. On the request of the petitioner Tehsildar was directed to inspect the spot who submitted the report on 12.9.1995 after inspection. Tehsildar reported that the land in dispute was agricultural. The A.D.M.(Finance & Revenue) held that the Tehsildar did not indicate that agriculture was actually being done in the land in dispute. Accordingly the report of Sub-Registrar was approved and value was determined to be Rs.7,76,832/-. Deficiency in stamp duty payable on the said valuation (after deducting the stamp duty already paid) came to Rs.1,04,545/-. Rs.100/- were imposed as penalty. Against the said order petitioner filed stamp Revision no. 90 of 1996-97 which was dismissed on 15.5.1998 by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority/Board of Revenue, Allahabad. The said order has also been challenged through this writ petition.
In the sale deed valuation was shown to be Rs.56,000/-. In the impugned orders it is also mentioned that the village where land in dispute is situate is adjacent to Nagar Palika boundary. The purchasers in the sale deed were Jai Devi petitioner, Smt. Satyawati and Smt. Maharani.
No irrebuttable presumption may be drawn that a small piece of land of agricultural land is always purchased for residential purposes. It is only one of the factors for the said finding. Moreover a plot situate within or just near abadi is much more expensive than a plot away from abadi but where abadi is likely to reach/extend in near future. It has not been stated in the impugned orders that adjacent to the land in dispute any house exists.
I have held in Ram Khelawan vs. State 2005 (98) R.D. 511 that market value for the purposes of stamp duty, while deciding the case finally, shall be determined on the same principles on which it is determined for payment of compensation in land acquisition cases and at that stage no reliance shall be placed on circle rates which are relevant only for initiation of proceedings.
Accordingly, in view of the above, matter would have required remand. However, in my opinion even after remand not more than 50% of the deficiency as determined by the impugned orders can be determined. 50% deficiency has already been deposited under interim order dated 11.12.1998. On inquiry from court learned counsel for the petitioner categorically states that petitioner will feel fully satisfied if the impugned orders are varied and it is held that only 50% of the deficiency in stamp duty as determined was payable.
Accordingly writ petition is disposed of. Impugned orders are varied/modified and it is held that there was only deficiency of Rs.52,322.50 which has already been paid. Matter ends. No further amount under the impugned orders is payable by the petitioner.
Order Date :- 24.9.2012
RS
