VINAYBHAI P PATEL CHAIRMAN Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been preferred against the order dated 21st June, 2004 passed by the Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation, Ahmedabad (Annexure "A" to the memo of the petition) under the provision of Section 32(A) of the Bombay Stamp Act, 1958. (hereianfter referred to as "the Act, 1958").

(2.) Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the order dated 21st June,2004 passed by Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation, Ahmedabad is patently dehors the provisions of the Bombay Stamp (Determination of Market Value of property) Rules,1984 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules, 1984"). No opportunity of hearing has ever been given to the petitioner and ex-parte order has been passed as well as the order is a non- speaking order. The document i.e. Conveyance deed was registered on 19th September, 1994 at the office of Sub- Registrar, Ahmedabad vide registration No.2339, whereas the so called Notice is alleged to have been given beyond the period of 7 years and, therefore, as per section 32A(4) of The Bombay Stamp Act, 1958 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act, 1958"), the respondent has no power, jurisdiction and authority to issue such type of Notice and, hence, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. In fact, after approximately 7 years of the date of registration of the document, the alleged notice appear to have been given. The petitioner has purchased the land for Rs.41,01,975/-, whereas the respondent has fixed the market price of the land in question at Rs.58,45,359/-. Thus, excessively exorbitant fixation of price and that too, without giving any opportunity of being heard to the petitioner, by passing a cyclostyled non-speaking order, is palpably arbitrary usage of power and, hence, the impugned order dated 21st June, 2004 (Annexure "A" to the memo of the petition) deserves to be quashed and set aside. The respondent No. 2 has not given any basis for fixation of higher market value than what is referred in the conveyance deed.

(3.) Learned Assistant Government Pleader Mr.K.L.Pandya for the respondents submitted that the order passed by the Deputy Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation, Ahmedabad is true, correct and in consonance with the facts of the present case. The market value of the land in question arrived at Rs.58,45,359/- has been fixed by respondent authority. No Appeal has been preferred against the said order and, therefore, this Court may not interfere with the order, which are at Annexure "A" to the memo of the petition.