Court No. - 6
Case :- WRIT - C No. - 26213 of 2003 Petitioner :- Javed Ahmad & Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru' Secy. Finance & Others Counsel for Petitioner :- B.S. Pandey,Rajesh Kumar Bind Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble B. Amit Sthalekar,J.
Seen the office report.
Heard Sri B.S. Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.
The petitioners in the writ petition are seeking quashing of the order dated 21.02.2003 passed by the respondent no. 2, Collector, Sonbhadra and the order dated 31.05.2003 passed by the respondent no. 3, Commissioner Vindhyachal Division, Mirzapur, arising out of proceedings under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (the Act, 1899).
Briefly stated the facts of the case, as stated in the writ petition, are that the petitioners purchased land in question bearing No. 331, area 0.1770 hectares out of total plot measuring 0.6070 hectares through sale deed dated 18.09.2000 and paid stamp duty on a total value of Rs. 95000/-. On an objection being raised that there was deficiency of stamp duty proceedings were initiated against the petitioners under the Act, 1899. The petitioners filed their objections and a report of the Naib Tehsildar was called, which was submitted on 01.02.2003 to which the petitioners also submitted their objections, Annexure- 2 to the writ petition. The Collector (Stamp), however, has held that the four petitioners are not related to one another though they have purchased the property through a common sale deed and since they are unrelated, therefore, the share of each individual vendee comes to about 442 square meters and that the land, which is less than 760 square meters in area, stamp duty would be computed at the rates bearing a flat rate applicable at abadi (residential) rates. He has passed the order dated 21.02.2002 and computed the market value of the property at Rs. 7,96,500/- and determined the stamp duty payable thereon as Rs. 70,150/- + penalty of Rs. 2,80,600/- and deficiency of registration fees to Rs. 3100/- total Rs. 3,53,850/- with interest at 18% per annum.
Aggrieved by the order of the Collector (Stamp), the petitioners preferred a stamp appeal, which has also been dismissed by the Commissioner Vindhyachal Division, Mirzapur by order dated 31.05.2003.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that in the report of the Naib Tehsildar, it has been mentioned that the plot in dispute is agricultural on which 'arhar' crop is being grown but he has stated that since the land is very small and that share of each person would come to only 442 square meters, therefore, the flat residential rate at Rs. 450 per square meters would be applicable as per the then existing circle rate. This report has been accepted by the Collector (Stamp), who has determined the market value of the property as well as deficiency of stamp duty accordingly.
I have gone through the pleadings of the parties as well as the documents on record and find that there is no dispute that the four petitioners, who have purchased the property in dispute are unrelated to each other and though they have jointly purchased the property in question but the share of each person in this joint property comes to only 442 square meters and that the same being less than 760 square meters, therefore, as per the then existing circle rate a flat rate of Rs. 450/- per square meters will be applicable for the purpose of determining the market value of the land. I therefore, do not find any illegality in the impugned order. However, I find no justification for the imposition of penalty at Rs. 2,80,600/-.
For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned orders dated 21.02.2003 passed by the respondent no. 2, Collector, Sonbhadra and the order dated 31.05.2003 passed by the respondent no. 3, Commissioner Vindhyachal Division, Mirzapur are modified to the extent that the penalty of Rs. 2,80,600/- imposed against the petitioners is set aside. It is also noted that under the interim order of this Court dated 02.07.2003 the petitioners were required to deposit 50% of the amount of deficiency, therefore, the petitioners will be entitled to adjustment of the amount, which they have already paid from the amount which they are now required to pay under the present order after deducting the amount of penalty.
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 S.K.