IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 2120 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 11.02.2009 Parveen Kumar and another ...Petitioners versus State of Punjab and others ...Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. P. K. S. Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion. Ms. Monica Chibber Sharma, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab accepts notice. In view of the nature of order which I propose to pass, learned State counsel submits that there is no necessity to file any counter affidavit. The petitioners purchased land measuring 2 kanals 6.5 marlas situated within the revenue estate of village Kurali, Tehsil Kharar District Ropar, vide registered sale deed dated 09.03.2006. The Sub Registrar, Kharar, after about two years, made a reference on 21.01.2008 to impound the sale deed and initiate proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, C.W.P NO. 2120 OF 2009 -2- 1899. The reference has been accepted by the Collector, S.A.S Nagar, Mohali who vide his impugned order dated 25.03.2008, has directed the petitioners to affix additional stamp duty of Rs.1,43,550/- along with interest @ 12% on the ground that at the relevant time the stamp duty on the sale deed ought to have been affixed as per collector's rate @ Rs.40,000/- per marla. The petitioners preferred an appeal which has also been dismissed by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala vide his impugned order dated 02.12.2008. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the impugned orders, I am of the considered view that this writ petition deserves to succeed. It is well settled, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court “State of Punjab and others vs. Mohabir Singh and others” (1996) 1 Supreme Court Cases 609. A vendee cannot be asked to pay additional stamp duty merely on the basis of collector's rate. Section 47-A (2) of the Act obligates the Collector to hold an inquiry after giving an opportunity to the parties to lead their evidence and then determine the market value of the land. The collector's rate can, at the best, be a piece of evidence to be relied upon by the Collector. No such exercise has been apparently done in the present case. For the reasons afore-stated, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned orders are set aside and the matter is C.W.P NO. 2120 OF 2009 -3- remitted to the Collector, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali for a fresh decision in accordance with law. The needful shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. FEBRUARY 11, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE