IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 4003 of 2009 [O&M] Date of Decision: 21st July, 2010. Bhupinder Singh Petitioner through Mr. Satbir Rathore, Advocate Versus Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar & Ors. Respondents through Mr. H.S.Brar, 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 impugns the orders dated 30.03.2007 [Annexure P-3] passed by the Collector, Hoshiarpur as well as dated 24.04.2008 [Annexure P-4] passed by the Commissioner, Jalandhar Division, Jalandhar whereby he was directed to pay Rs. 20,400/- towards deficiency in stamp duty under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 in respect of the sale deed No. 1271 dated 28.8.2006. The star argument raised on behalf of the petitioner is based upon a Division Bench judgment of this Court in Manoj Kumar v State of Haryana, 2008 [3] RCR[Civil], 959 wherein it was held that when a sale deed is executed pursuant to a decree passed in a civil suit for specific performance, the Registering Authority can not demand stamp duty or registration fee as per the Collector's rate and the same are leviable as per the sale consideration mentioned in the sale deed and/or agreement to sell. The aforementioned judgment of the Division Bench has since been over-ruled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v Manoj Kumar, 2010[2] RCR [Civil], 296 holding that no sale deed can be registered at a rate lesser than that notified by the Collector. In this view of the matter, no interference with the impugned orders is called for. Dismissed. July 21, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE