IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD FRIDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.6280 of 2005 Between: The Joint Sub-Regsitrar – IRO, Karimnagar. ... PETITIONER AND Bukka Bharathi. ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner : GP For Arbitration Counsel for the Respondent : Mr. Sampath Prabhakar Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER: This revision is directed against the order of the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar in CMA.No.2 of 2004 dated 09.08.2005 under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. The State is aggrieved by the said order of the appellate authority where the market value of the land and the document in question is reduced from Rs.340/- per sq. yard to Rs.225/- per sq. yard. 2. The respondent herein presented a sale deed in her favour with respect to the land admeasuring 15 guntas in Sy.Nos.784, 785 and 787 at Rampur locality of Karimnagar. The sale deed shows that the true and apparent consideration is Rs.1,63,400/-, which was on the basis of agreed value of Rs.150/- per sq. yard. When the said document was presented for registration, the sub-registrar made a reference under Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act on the ground that the document is undervalued. The said document, therefore, was registered as pending document bearing No.P 56/2001 and a reference was accordingly made to the Collector under the Stamp Act, who has determined the market value of the land at Rs.350/- per sq. yard vide its order in file No.MV/47-A/96/2002 dated 23.02.2002. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent herein preferred an appeal before the Senior Civil Judge, Karimnagar, which has since been allowed in part by reducing the market value to Rs.225/- per sq. yard. 3. Heard learned Government Pleader appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Sampath Prabhakar Reddy appearing for the respondent. 4. Learned Government Pleader has contended that the order of the lower appellate Court is devoid of any reasons and the reduction of market value is not justified in view of the fact that the primary authority had assessed the market value based upon the personal inspection of the property and the sales, statistics collected by the authority for the relevant year, which is disclosed in the order of the primary authority. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent relies upon two decisions of this Court in MADDULA NAGASIROMANI v. SUBORDINATE JUDGE, KOVVUR[1] and an unreported judgment of this Court in CRP.No.4841 of 2005 dated 23.01.2009. Learned counsel also submits that the personal inspection by the primary authority itself shows that the land in question is not comparable with the residential properties with which the land in question is compared. He submits that though the value of the land cannot be more than Rs.150/- per sq. yard, the respondent has accepted the value as fixed by the lower appellate Court and have not challenged the order of the lower appellate Court. 6. I have considered the aforesaid contentions. It is, no doubt, true that the lower appellate Court’s order where the value is reduced from Rs.340/- to Rs.225/- is not supported by any reasons and appears to be a conclusion based upon the comparative and probable value. In normal course, I would have sent back the appeal to the lower appellate Court for fresh consideration. However, as the small issue is pending for quite a long time, I have considered the matter on merits after hearing both the learned counsel. The order of the primary authority shows and records physical features of the land in question, which is said to be adjacent to a river surrounded by agricultural fields and is a low lying area of 120’ depth from the main road. Further, there are no constructions around the vicinity, as obviously, agricultural fields surround the land. The area is totally undeveloped and in future the land may be good for house plots. After noticing these physical features, the primary authority, further compared the value of the residential plots, as the two sale deeds, which are taken into consideration show that the said plots are near existing houses and thereby it is evident that the value of the plots in residential area is taken into consideration for fixing the value of the land in question. The lower appellate Court was, therefore, justified in not accepting the said value. The value of Rs.225/- per sq. yard fixed under the impugned order and which is not questioned by the respondent, therefore, can safely be adopted as representing the true and correct market value of the land in question. The revision petition is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. The respondent shall pay the deficit stamp duty and deficit registration fee, if any, if not already paid by taking the value of the property at Rs.225/- per sq. yard. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ VILAS V. AFZULPURKAR, J March 5, 2010 DSK [1] 1996 (1) ALT 335