CWP No.4483 of 2001 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.4483 of 2001 Date of Decision:- March 19, 2010 Shiv Narain and others ...Petitioners Versus Commissioner, Rohtak Division and others ...Respondents Present: Ms. Rimplejeet Kaur, Advocate for Mr.Sachin Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.R.D.Sharma, DAG, Haryana. ***** CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.KANNAN 1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not? No 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Yes K.KANNAN, J. (ORAL) 1. The order in challenge is the decision by the Collector and the Appellate Authority, while adjudicating on an alleged under-valuation of a sale deed dated 9.1.1997. The property had been valued at Rs.1.50 lacs in the document and registered. The purchaser appears to have shown the building constructed thereon was in a dilapidated construction, when in an inspection, it was found that the property was a pucca construction and the construction was more valuable than what was stated in the sale deed. The Collector had also found, which the Appellate Authority affirmed that the valuation fixed at Tehsil Samalkha for the year 1996-97 for Samalkha CWP No.4483 of 2001 -2- Model Town was Rs.700/- per sq. yrd. and at such a valuation, the property which was brought for registration including the value of the superstructure, must have been assessed at Rs.4,28,875/- and for excess of Rs.1.50 lacs, the Collector and the appellate authority assessed an additional sum of Rs.43,226/-, as the amount of stamp duty payable. 2. In an adjudication under Section 47-A, the duty of the Collector is to ascertain the market value. The market value cannot merely be replicated as the value fixed by the Collector already, which in some places are called as guideline value or the circle value. When a complaint of under-valuation is done and when a reference is made by the Registering Officer for the determination of the market value, the Collector is bound to secure evidence that the valuation given by the purchaser was deliberately under-valued and the value was more than what was stated in the sale deed. In a case, where the property is not merely of the land but also of the superstructure, the Collector's assessment must also give out the split up of the value of the land and the superstructure. The order merely referring to the fixed rate made by the Collector as the basis for determining the market value, makes meaningless the need for adjudication that Section 47-A of the Stamp Act enjoins. The order of the Collector as affirmed by the Appellate Authority are set aside and the matter is remitted to the Collector again for fresh consideration in the light of the directions given above, particularly with reference to the determination of the market value, which shall mean the value which had been shown in any particular registered document at or about the same time when the disputed document was registered and take that as basis subject to any variation that may be possible in view of the location, character and the extent of property, dealt with in any other data sale that the Collector may rely upon. It shall also be open to the purchaser to produce any document of registration during the relevant time that CWP No.4483 of 2001 -3- proximates to the valuation as given by him in his document. The Collector shall undertake the adjudication with reference to the land as well as constructed portion within a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. 3. The writ petition is allowed on the above terms. March 19, 2010 (K.KANNAN) Vt JUDGE