IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. C.W.P. No. 4958 of 2002. Date of Decision: 16th February, 2009. Ranjit Singh ..Petitioner through Mr. Rajesh Dadwal, Advocate Versus State of Punjab & Ors. ..Respondents through Mr. G.S.Attariwala, 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 is aggrieved at the Memo dated 24.5.2002 whereby the Sub Registrar, Dasuya has refused to register the sale deed presented by him and has made recommendations under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 to the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Registrar, Hoshiarpur for necessary action. While making its recommendations, the Sub Registrar has appended a list of the sale transactions which were put up before him for registration and which he has declined on the ground of deficiency in affixation of stamp duty. The petitioner's sale deed also figures at Sr. No. 49 as according to the Sub Registrar, the petitioner has not affixed the stamp duty as per the rate determined on the basis of the nature of land and mentioned in the list [Annexure P-12]. The respondents in their counter-affidavit have justified the action of the Sub Registrar in withholding the registration or making recommendations, referred to above. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length and perused the record. During the course of hearing, it could not indeed be disputed that sub-Section [2] of Section 47-A of the Act casts a duty upon the Collector to determine the market value of the land in respect of which a reference has been received by him from the Sub Registrar, after giving due notice and opportunity of being heard to the affected party. It is also well known that the market value of the land is required to be determined by the Collector after taking into consideration the relevant material including the Collector's rate relied upon by the Sub Registrar in the list [Annexure P-12]. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab v Mohabir Singh & Ors. [1996] 1 SCC, 609, however, has held that the liability to pay additional stamp duty can not be fastened merely on the basis of the Collector's rate which, at the best, would be a material piece of evidence to be taken into account by the Collector while determining the market value. In the instant case, the Collector is yet to determine the market value of the land of the petitioner. It appears that the writ petition at this stage is premature inasmuch as the Collector is required to determine the market value of the petitioner's land after hearing him as envisaged under Section 47-A[2] of the Act. Consequently, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Deputy Commissioner-cum-Registrar, Hoshiarpur to determine the market value of the petitioner's land after hearing and giving him an opportunity to produce the relevant material to show that the market value of the land suggested by the Sub Registrar is on the higher side. It is after considering the said material that the Registrar shall determine the market value of the petitioner's land. The petitioner's liability to affix the stamp duty on the proposed sale deed would arise accordingly. Let the needful be done within a period of two months from the date a certified copy of this order is received. Disposed of. February 16, 2009. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE