RUXAMANIBEN JAGDISHCHANDRA SHAH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of this petition, the present petitioner has challenged the impugned order dated 22. 12. 2000 passed by Dy. Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation Office, Himatnagar as well as the order dated 13. 9. 2007 passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Gandhinagar, Notice dated 2. 2. 2008 issued by the Dy. Mamlatdar, Stamp (Special Recovery) Officer, Himatnagar - Annexures 'b', 'e' and 'f' respectively. Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP for the respondents.

(2.) IT is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioner that without giving any details regarding determination of market value and without giving any notice, order was passed by the Dy. Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation, Sabarkantha District, Himatnagar, on the ground of development of the area. The said order is at Annexure 'b'. It is submitted by him that respondent no. 2 has not considered the fact of the sale deed and also the nearby sale instances were not taken into consideration while fixing the market price. He further submitted that the respondent no. 2 has passed the impugned order on the basis of which he has valued the property in question at an excessively exorbitant rate and therefore, deficit Stamp Duty of Rs. 1,71,820/- was required to be paid to the authorities. It is submitted by him that the respondent authority has not considered the fact that the petitioner has purchased the plots in question by paying the market value which was prevailing at the relevant time. It is also submitted by the learned advocate that the property in question is situated at survey no. 871 at village and Tal. Bayad, District Sabarkantha which is not a developed area. It is his submission that without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the appellate authority has also passed a non-speaking order on 13. 9. 2007. Thereafter, notice has been issued under section 2. 2. 2008 of the Bombay Land Revenue Code by the respondent No. 4, Dy. Mamlatdar, Special (Recovery Officer), Stamp Duty Valuation Office, Himatnagar. Therefore, it is prayed that the decisions of the respondent authorities are required to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) IT is held by the Dy. Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation Office, Himatnagar that taking into consideration Statement-I showing the price of stamp duty valuation for approval pertaining to City Survey Area, Bayad, and taking into consideration the other relevant factors like development of the surrounding area, he determined the price of the property in question. The decision of the Dy. Collector, Stamp Duty Valuation Office, has been confirmed by the Appellate Authority.