MOHAN SHET Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the petitioner is aggrieved by the endorsement dated 9-9-92 issued by the second respondent refusing the registration of the sale deed presented before him. The sale deed referred to the consideration, as Rs. 1,18,000/-. According to the petitioner the deed was presented for registration and the second respondent proceeded to register the same, in fact he had put his seal on the document and at this stage for reasons best known to him he refused to complete the process of registration; instead he made the endorsement which states:

(2.) the petitioner has attributed ulterior motive to the secondrespondent which has been denied by the second respondent. For the purpose of this writ petition, it is unnecessary for me to consider the same. I think it is open to the petitioner to agitate this matter elsewhere.

(3.) the under-valuation of an instrument produced forregistration is taken care of by Section 45-a of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957. The said provision states that while registering any instrument if the registering officer has reason to believe that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he may refer the same to the deputy commissioner for determination of the market value after registering such an instrument. Section 45-a therefore does not empower the registering officer to decline to register the document on the ground that market value has not been truly disclosed in the deed in question. He should have reason to believe that the property has not been properly valued and on the basis of this reason he should refer the document for proper valuation after registering the document. The deputy commissioner shall have to proceed to determine the market value of the property as provided in the said provision. The power vested in the registering officer to make a reference is not an arbitrary power but a power to be exercised provided he has valid reason to believe that the property has been under-valued. The existence of a reason is the foundation for exercising the power under Section 45-a. This aspect shall have to be borne in mind while considering the validity of the action taken by the second respondent in the instant case.