IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD (23RD) DAY OF JANUARY, TWO THOUSAND AND TWELVE Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.3649 of 2011 Between: State of A.P., rep. by its District Collector, & Others .... Petitioners And: Voona Sarveswara Rao … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Civil Revision Petition No.3649 of 2010 ORDER: This revision petition is directed against the order dated 07.08.2010 in CMA No.22 of 2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam, wherein the said appeal filed by the respondent herein was allowed, directing the Sub Registrar to accept the valuation adopted in the sale deed presented by the respondent. 2. Heard both sides. Perused the record. 3. The respondent herein purchased Ac.1.67 cents of land in four different survey numbers under sale deed, wherein the value of the property was mentioned as Rs.16,17,000/- at the rate of Rs.9,85,000/- per acre. The Joint Sub Registrar made his own assessment fixing the value of the property at Rs.1,20,27,958/- and directed the respondent herein to pay deficit stamp duty of Rs.9,32,150/- and registration fee of Rs.51,790/-. The Joint Sub Registrar made a reference to the District Registrar under section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act for determination of the market value. The District Registrar by order dated 31.08.2007 confirmed the assessment made by the Joint Sub Registrar. In the said order, it was observed that to the east of the subject land there is a road at a distance of 200 meters, in the north, there is main road at the distance of 100 meters, on the west, there is Kusalapuram boundary and there is also a rice mill nearby. It was further observed that on local enquiry, the property was carrying value of Rs.70 to 80 lakhs per acre. The District Registrar further noticed that similar land in Sy.No157/3 of Gujarathipet of Srikakulam was registered on square yard rate basis. The District Registrar therefore confirmed valuation as assessed by the Joint Sub Registrar at Rs.1485/- per square yard. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent herein preferred an appeal in CMA No.22 of 2007 before the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam. By impugned order, the said appeal was allowed. Hence, the present revision by the State. 4. Admittedly, the subject matter is an agricultural land and it was also being cultivated and there are coconut trees also in a portion of the land. Even according to the District Registrar’s order, the roads are situated about 200 meters away from the land. It is also not in dispute that the land has not been converted into one for non-agricultural purpose nor is any lay out formed or roads laid for the same. Even assuming for a moment that the land has potential to be converted into house sites, in the event of such development, in a substantial portion to an extent up to 40% of the land has to be left for the purpose of roads etc. It is well settled and as held in ‘Maddula Nagasiromani v. Subordinate Judge, Kovvur[1]’ for the purpose of determining the stamp duty payable, the present market value of the land alone has to be taken into consideration, but not its potentialities or future developmental prospects. It is not the case of the petitioners-State that the value of the land is mentioned low in the document if taken as agricultural land. The contention of the petitioners that the value has to be assessed on square yard basis in view of its future potentiality to develop into the house sites is untenable. The impugned order, allowing the appeal filed by the respondent herein and directing the Sub Registrar to accept the valuation mentioned in the sale deed does not therefore call for any interference. 5. In the result, the civil revision petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. The interim stay granted earlier stands vacated. G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 23.01.2012 bss [1] 1996(1) ALT 335