Patna High Court
Case Details
Patna High Court CWJC No.6820 of 2012 (5) dt.08-03-2013 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.6820 of 2012 ====================================================== 1. Shahzad Ahmad S/O Ejaj Ahmad @ Munna R/O Mohalla- Bahadurganj, P.S.-Laheria Sarai, District- Darbhanga 2. Shaharyar Ahmad S/O Ejaj Ahmad @ Munna R/O Mohalla- Bahadurganj, P.S.-Laheria Sarai, District- Darbhanga Versus .... .... Petitioner/s 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Inspector General, Registration, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 3. The Member, Board Of Revenue, Govt. Of Bihar, Patna 4. The Commissioner, Darbhanga 5. The Collector Cum District Registrar, Darbhanga 6. The Sub-Registrar, Darbhanga 7. Gulam Mustafa S/O Abdullah Ansari R/O Mohalla- Dumduma, Post- Laheria Sarai, District- Darbhanga .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Narayan, Advocate. For the Respondent/s : Mr. Kumari Amrita G.P-10 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAILESH KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 5 08-03-2013 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and Assistant Counsel to Government Pleader No. 10 for the State. Petitioners are aggrieved on account of demand for payment of the additional stamp duty on the sale deed dated 3rd of August 1996, executed and registered in theirs favour. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that they have been demanded additional stamp of Rs. 99,160/- after valuation of the land under the registered sale deed, was got ascertained by the Collector (respondent no. 5) as per its order dated 27th of August 2003, as contained in Annexure-2 in a
Legal Reasoning
Patna High Court CWJC No.6820 of 2012 (5) dt.08-03-2013 Stamp Value Case No. 137 of 1996 -1997. Petitioners, on being aggrieved by such order, preferred an Appeal before the Devisional Commissioner (respondent no. 4) and the same on being dismissed by order dated 29.05.2006 vide annexure- 5, preferred a Revision against the said order before the Member, Board of Revenue, Government of Bihar, Patna (respondent no. 3), which upon hearing was also dismissed by order dated 29th of January 2009, with observation that the land, in question, a ditch in which water remains filled up with and as such, the same cannot be used for any purpose. It is further submitted that the order passed by the Collector (respondent no. 5) suffers from serious illegality as much as, before passing the order, neither the petitioners were noticed nor heard. The report of the Circle Officer with respect to the value of the land, in question, was acted upon. The report submitted by the Circle Officer, has been considered by the Collector in its order, indicating that as per the general guideline issued by the State of Bihar on 07.08.1996, (Annexure- A to the counter affidavit), the land which is fit for commercial utilization, is Rs. 1,25,000/- per katha and the residential land Rs. 90,000/- per katha. While passing the order, there is no consideration with respect to the land, in question, with the nature of the land. It is further submitted that it is not in dispute that the land under consideration, is a ditch and as such, the report of the Circle Officer that the value would be Rs. 1,20,000/- per Patna High Court CWJC No.6820 of 2012 (5) dt.08-03-2013 katha does not stand to reason and the same is even beyond the rate, prescribed for the residential land. It is further submitted that on perusal of the guideline, prevalent prior to issue of the guideline dated 7th of August 1996, as annexed to the reply to the counter affidavit, it would appear that in the Mauza Damduma, the land which is ditch and filled up with water, has been valued at the rate of 30,000/- per katha. It is, accordingly, submitted that order has been passed without consideration of the relevant documents, as applicable on the date of the execution of the deed, in question. It is further submitted that while considering the appeal as also the revision, by the respondents no. 3 and 4 respectively, the correct aspect of the matter was not considered and the appeal as well as revision of the petitioners, was dismissed.
Legal Reasoning
Learned counsel for the State submits that the land has been valued after physical verification, and on the basis of the report, submitted by the concerned Circle Officer, Sadar Darbhanga. Considering the submissions of the parties, it would appear that after registration of the sale deed, the same was referred to the Collector for valuation of the land in order to ascertain the correct stamp duty, payable on registered document a case was registered vide Case No. 137/1996-97. The respondent no. 5 disposed of the matter by order dated 27th of August 2003 (Annexure-2) holding that the value of the Patna High Court CWJC No.6820 of 2012 (5) dt.08-03-2013 land, would be at the rate of 1,20,000/- per katha, accepting the report of the Circle Officer and accordingly, it was further found that a sum of Rs. 99,160/- as additional stamp duty, payable on such deed. It would further appear that the respondent no. 5 did not enquire as to what would be the value of the land on the date of registration. The date of registration of the deed, in question, is 3rd of August 1996 and on the date, guideline indicates the value of the land at the rate of 1,25,000/- for commercial land and 90, 000/- for residential. The relevant guideline for ascertaining the value issued by the Government, would be of the date prior to registration of the sale deed i.e 3rd of August 1990. Besides, it would not appear from the order passed by the respondent no. 5, as to whether the petitioners were provided the copy of the report of the Circle Officer, Sadar Darbhanga forming the basis of passing his order, so as to, give an opportunity to consider the report and file objection, if any. Moreover, it does not appear as to whether the petitioners having been any notice or knowledge of the aforesaid case. For the above reasons, I find that the order dated 27th of August 2003, passed by the respondent no. 5, cannot be sustained in law. Consequently, the orders passed on appeal and on revision without considering the above aspect of the matter, equally, are not sustained in law. The orders as contained in Annexures – 2 , 5 and 6 stand quashed and the Patna High Court CWJC No.6820 of 2012 (5) dt.08-03-2013 matter is remitted back to the respondent no. 5 to pass fresh order in accordance with law, after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and also the copy of documents, on the basis of which, the authority proposes to consider the valuation of the land, in question. Such order be passed expeditiously, preferably, within a period of six months on receipt/production of certified copy of the present order. The writ application stands disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J)