IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 1816 of 2009. Date of Decision: 4th May, 2009. Veena Sharma ..Petitioner through None Versus State of Punjab & Ors. .Respondents through Mr. G.S.Atttariwala, Addl.AG, Punjab. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT. 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? SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL) The petitioner seeks quashing of the orders dated 27.9.2007 and 14.5.2008 [Annexures P-1 and P-3] respectively whereby she has been asked to affix the additional stamp duty to the tune of Rs.1,09,312/- in respect of Plot No. 209, measuring 100 square yards situate within the revenue estate of Ludhiana [East] and which has been further affirmed in appeal by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala. If one reads the order dated 27.9.2007 passed by the Collector, Ludhiana, it is apparent that the petitioner has been asked to deposit the additional stamp duty and registration charges on the solitary ground that the Collector's rate of the subject property at the relevant time was Rs.12000/- per square yard. Suffice it to say that Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act obligates the Collector to determine the market value of the property for the purposes of affixation of the stamp duty. The Collector's rate can only be a piece of evidence to be referred to or relied upon by the Collector while determining the market value. The liability to affix additional stamp duty can not be fastened on the basis of the Collector's rate alone. In other words, a duty is cast upon the Collector to call upon the relevant records/material and then only determine the market value of the property on the date of registration of the instrument. Unfortunately, no such exercise has been carried out and the impugned orders have been passed solely on the basis of the Collector's rate. For the reasons afore-stated, the impugned orders dated 27.9.2007 and 14.5.2008 are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector, Ludhiana, for decision afresh, in accordance with law. Disposed of. Dasti. May 04, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE