IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD THURSDAY, THE FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND TEN HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G. BHAVANI PRASAD Civil Revision Petition No.3950 of 2007 Between: The Sub-Registrar (Registration) Adoni and another .. Petitioners AND Beerur Ramesh, S/o B. Ramanjaneyulu .. Respondents ORDER: The judgment and decree in C.M.A.No.8 of 2003 dated 20- 02-2007 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, is the subject matter of the present revision petition at the instance of the State. The Sub Registrar, Adoni, submitted the subject case to the District Registrar/Collector under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act for determination of the market value of the property effected by document No.P-123/ADN/02, which is a sale deed in respect of a house in 230.9 square yards within the limits of Adoni Municipality. The District Registrar in his orders dated 27-01-2003 found that the spot inspection of the property on 21-03-2003 (23-01- 2003) revealed that the property is without any amenities like roads, sanitation, water, electrification etc., by the Municipal authorities, while the building therein is an old one with cracks from bottom to top requiring reconstruction and repairs. The old house appearing to be aged 40 years was noted by the District Registrar to not reflect a value of Rs.1325/- per square yard and in spite of the same, the District Registrar determined the land value of the house at Rs.1000/- per square yard presumably on the basis of his local enquiry. While he made modification and revision of the Sub Registrar’s value assessing the stamp duty to be charged at Rs.52,440/-, he still directed the stamp duty to be assessed on a market value of Rs.3,64,500/-. The direction to pay the deficit stamp duty and registration fee was the subject of challenge in C.M.A.No.8 of 2003 and the Senior Civil Judge, Adoni in his order dated 20-02-2007 extracted the contentions of the parties and the findings of the District Registrar and observed that there should be a proper and correct assessment of the market value based on any authentic evidence as proof guided by the statutory guidelines. The learned Judge also noted the dependability of the basic value register maintained by the registering authorities and the disadvantages and deficiencies in the property noted by the District Registrar were also referred to by the learned Judge. The learned Judge noted that the basic value in the area was only Rs.390/- per square yard and it was also noted that the value of the building arrived at was not based on any assessment by any technical person. The order of the District Registrar was also noted to be not based on any document available on record and consequent conclusion of the learned judge was that the orders of the District Registrar do not reflect proper value of the property. The learned Judge, observing that any findings of the District Registrar are subject to judicial review, found that the valuation mentioned in the document at Rs.2,63,000/- shall have to be accepted in the absence of any contrary evidence. The appeal was consequently allowed directing the Sub-Registrar to register the document at the value mentioned in the document. The State, through the Sub-Registrar and the District Registrar, seeks to challenge the said order on the ground that the District Registrar arrived at the value of the property on proper material and also took into account all the adverse circumstances against the meagre value. The appellate order is, therefore, sought to be reversed. Sri N.A. Ramachandra Murthy, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the revision petitioners and Sri B. Vijay Bhaskar, learned counsel for the respondents are heard. The order of the Sub-Registrar, Adoni, referring the case to the District Collector/District Registrar for determination of the market value attempted to value the property at Rs.4,36,800/-. But the District Registrar himself found such high estimate to be without any dependable factual basis. The claimant appearing before the District Registrar positively stated that they purchased the property only for the amount specified in the document and there was no under valuation. The District Registrar noted the location of the site at the tail end of the ward without any amenities and with a practically dilapidated building in it. The District Registrar in his personal inspection found that none of the civic amenities were extended to the site in question by the Municipal authorities and what local enquiry made was not stated by the District Registrar in his order. The assessed land value at Rs.1000/- per square yard was not shown to have been reflected in any other transactions at about that time in about that locality. The assessment adopted by the District Registrar practically fixing a via media between the value stated by the Sub-Registrar and the value stated by the parties is not stated to be based on any document on record. The learned Senior Civil Judge made a reasonable analysis of the facts and circumstances and drew sustainable conclusions based on the broad human probabilities on record. When the value adopted by the parties in the document is much more than the value of Rs.390/- per square yard mentioned in the basic value register maintained by the department itself, no allegations of under valuation can be sustained in the absence of any definite material. The conclusions of the Senior Civil Judge cannot be interfered with merely on surmises and conjectures. Accordingly, the Civil Revision Petition has to fail and is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ____________________ G. BHAVANI PRASAD, J Date: 01-07-2010 Ksn