C.W.P. No.17447 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P. No.17447 of 2008 Date of decision:06.08.2009. D.M. Land Developers and Builders ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASBIR SINGH Present: Mr. Sanjeev Manrai, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Anil Sharma, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, for the respondents. ***** JASBIR SINGH, J. (ORAL). This writ petition has been filed to lay challenge to the order dated 29.03.2007 (P6), directing the petitioner to deposit an amount of Rs.12,75,480/- towards deficient payment of stamp duty, when a sale deed was got executed by the petitioner, on 12.12.2006. Further challenge is to the order dated 14.05.2008 (P8), dismissing appeal filed by the petitioner. Counsel for the parties heard. It is apparent from the record that the petitioner purchased 8 kanals of land, vide sale deed dated 12.12.2006 @ Rs.18,00,000/- per acre. The land in question was shown as agricultural land. Sub Registrar impounded the sale deed, on the ground that deficient stamp duty has been affixed. On his report, matter was taken up by the C.W.P. No.17447 of 2008 -2- Collector under the provisions of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Duty Act, 1899. After notice, to the petitioner, it was observed that actual value of the land comes to Rs.1,59,72,000/- per acre. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed. When notice of motion was issued, in this writ petition, following contention of counsel for the petitioner was noticed by this Court, on 01.10.2008: - “Learned counsel for the petitioner inter-alia contends that the stamp duty on the instrument of sale dated 09.06.2006 in respect of the same village was assessed at the rate of Rs.18,00,000/- per acre, whereas in case of the land of the same village about six months later, the value has been assessed at Rs.1,59,72,000/-. Learned counsel further contends that orders (Annexure P4 and P5) were not disputed by the revenue and, therefore, such orders will be relevant to determine the market value in respect of instrument of sale executed later.” To say that the sale deed was executed as per rates prevalent in the village, for agricultural land, reference was made to the two earlier orders passed by the Collector, releasing sale deeds, regarding purchase of land in the village where property, in dispute, is situated. Perusal of documents indicates that vide order Annexure P-4, Collector had held that value of agricultural land, in village Bhora, is about Rs.18,00,000/- per acre. Sale deed, in that case, was registered on 09.06.2006. Similarly, the sale deed, which was in issue, in order dated 20.06.2006 (P5), was executed on 09.06.2006. In that case also, value of the agricultural land was accepted at Rs.18,00,000/- per acre. C.W.P. No.17447 of 2008 -3- It is contention of counsel for the petitioner that, within 6 months, value of the land in village Bhora cannot rise 6-7 times, as has been held by the Collector, vide impugned order Annexure P-6. Counsel further states that before arriving at the conclusion that the land purchased by the petitioner is commercial in nature and value of the land is Rs.1,59,72,000/- per acre, no inquiry was conducted by the Collector. The documents produced by the petitioner were not even noticed. As such the impugned orders (P6 & P7) cannot be sustained. To support his contention, counsel places reliance upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Lalita Devi and another Vs. The Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon and another, 2001(3) Civil Court Cases, 4, wherein it has been held that before determining value of the land purchased, it is incumbent upon the Collector to conduct an inquiry, to ascertain the current value. In the present case, perusal of the orders shows that no inquiry was conducted. Everything appears to have been decided on the basis of the personal knowledge of the officer. In appeal also, no finding was given as to how the Collector has come to the conclusion that the property in question is commercial in nature and not agricultural, as has been asserted by the petitioner. In Fard/Jamabandi Annexure P-2, nature of the land is shown as agricultural. Counsel for the respondents that value assessed in orders Annexures P-4 and P-5 does not reflect the factual situation, existing at the spot. Be that as it may, it is open to the respondents – State to initiate any action, in those cases also, as per law. In view of facts mentioned above, this writ petition is allowed. Impugned orders Annexures P-6 and P-8 are set aside. C.W.P. No.17447 of 2008 -4- Counsel for the petitioner very fairly states that the petitioner shall deposit an amount of Rs.4 lac with the Collector, to safeguard interest of the Revenue, within a period of 15 days from today. Upon his doing so, the Collector is directed to proceed further to determine value of the land in dispute, as per provisions of Section 47-A of the Act. Before passing any order, opportunity of hearing and to adduce evidence, be afforded to the petitioner. Disposed of. Copy of order be supplied to counsel for the parties dasti, on payment. August 06, 2009. ( JASBIR SINGH ) vinod JUDGE