IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P NO. 2465 OF 2009 DECIDED ON : 16.02.2009 M/S Gurgaon Industrial Cons. (P ) Ltd. ...Petitioner versus The Commissioner and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT Present : Mr. Sanjay Vij, Advocate, for the petitioner. SURYA KANT, J. (ORAL) Notice of motion. Mr. R. D. Sharma, Senior DAG, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of all the respondents. Keeping in view the nature of order which I propose to pass, there is no necessity to call upon the respondents to file any counter-affidavit. The petitioner is aggrieved at the order dated 27.06.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Collector, Gurgaon, whereby it has been asked to affix the additional stamp duty of Rs.6,08,710/- in respect of Plot No. 452 measuring 540 sq. mtrs situated in Udyog Vihar, Phase-IV, Gurgaon, re-allotted in the petitioner's favour by HSIDC. The petitioner is also aggrieved at the order dated 06.12.2007 passed by the Commissioner, Gurgaon Division, Gurgaon-cum-Appellate Authority, upholding the aforementioned order of the Collector. C.W.P NO. 2465 OF 2009 -2- The impugned order passed by the Collector reveals that the Stamp Auditor, Gurgaon has sent a report dated 27.04.2007 pointing out some alleged deficiency towards the stamp duty at the time of registration of the conveyance deed. Accepting the said report, the Collector has passed the impugned order, the relevant part of which reads as follows : “ I have seen the report of Stamp Auditor Gurgaon and have also heard the counsel for the seller. After hearing and perusing the Wasika, I have reached the conclusion that the seller was re-allotted the aforesaid plot No. 452 measuring 540 sq. mtrs. Phase-IV, Industrial Estate, Udyog Vihar, Gurgaon by the department of HSIDC, Gurgaon. The aforesaid Wasika has been got registered on a lesser value on which as per Stamp Auditor Rs.5,94,710/- is deficient towards stamp and Rs.14,000/- are payable towards registration fee which is assessed correctly. Hence, I ordered that on the aforesaid Wasika Rs.5,94,710/- towards deficient stamp duty and Rs.14,000/- towards registration fee, totaling Rs.6,08,710/- both towards stamp and registration fee be recovered from the seller”. C.W.P NO. 2465 OF 2009 -3- As may be seen, the Collector has mechanically accepted the report of the Stamp Auditor overlooking the statutory obligation cast upon him under Section 47-A(2) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 in terms whereof the Collector is required to determine the market value on consideration of the relevant material. The Stamp Auditor's report could at the best be a piece of evidence for determining the market value of the property. It could not have been the sole basis to fasten the liability upon the petitioner to pay any additional stamp duty. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in “State of Punjab and others vs. Mohabir Singh and others” (1996) 1 Supreme Court Cases 609. For the reasons aforementioned, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 27.06.2007 (Annexure P-1) passed by the Collector, Gurgaon, is set aside and in sequel thereto, the appellate order dated 06.12.2007 (Annexure P-3) cannot sustain and the same is also quashed. The matter is remitted to the Collector, Gurgaon for 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 16, 2009 (SURYA KANT) shalini JUDGE