IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 7249 of 2009. [O&M] Date of Decision: 29th September, 2010. Smt. Anju Chander Petitioner through Mr. Sushil Saini, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Anr. Respondents through Mr. K.D.S.Sidhu, DAG, 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 order dated 9.10.2002 [Annexure P-4] passed by the Collector, SAS Nagar, Mohali whereby she has been directed to deposit the alleged deficient stamp duty of `6,59,100/- along with interest @12% per annum. She also challenges the order dated 04.02.2009 [Annexure P-5] passed by the Commissioner, Patiala Division, Patiala, dismissing her appeal against the afore-mentioned order of the Collector. The petitioner has been directed to affix the additional stamp duty charges, referred to above on a Gift Deed dated 22.03.2005 got registered by her father whereby land measuring 14 kanals 13 marlas situated in village Mundi Kharar, District Mohali has been gifted to her out of love and affection. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the impugned orders. There is no legal or factual basis for the respondent authorities for not treating the subject land as 'agricultural land' by overlooking the entries in the revenue record merely because in the same vicinity, a few residential houses have been constructed. It may be noticed that the petitioner had affixed the stamp duty as per the Collector's rate fixed by the respondents themselves. The actual market value of the land was wholly irrelevant as the 'gift deed' was not executed in lieu of any monetary consideration. Suffice it to say that the authorities ought not to have proceeded against the petitioner in the same manner as they may be required to assess the stamp duty charges/registration fee in a case of registration of a sale deed and/or any other instrument of transferring ownership/title in immovable property on the exchange of consideration. For the reasons aforementioned, the writ petition is allowed and the impugned orders dated 9.10.2002 and 4.2.2009 [Annexures P-4 and P-5] are hereby set aside. Dasti. September 29, 2010. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE