ASMATHULLAH KHAN Vs. CHIEF CONTROLLING REVENUE AUTHORITY CUM INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION SANTHOME CHENNAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appeal is preferred by the Appellant under Section 47-A(10) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, against the order of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration, Santhome, Chennai-600 004, the First Respondent herein, dated 14.9.2005 in proceeding No. 65639/N2/2004 modifying the order passed by the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), Salem, Namakkal & Dharmapuri Districts, Salem, the Second Respondent herein, in S.R. No. 146/02/KG-I, dated 30.4.2003.

(2.) The Appellant purchased the property measuring a total extent of 3060 sq. ft., with building thereon bearing Door No. 92F, R.S. No. 698 of Poganapalli Village, Krishnagiri panchayat, for sale consideration of 24,20,000/- from one K.C. Krishnan and others under a Sale Deed dated 10.6.2002 and the same was presented for registration before the Joint Sub-Registrar-III, Krishnagiri, the Third Respondent herein and the said Sale Deed was registered as Document No. 856 of 2002. The Appellant paid the stamp duty of Rs. 50,400/- The Third Respondent was of the view that the market value in the document is not true. Therefore, the he determined the market value at Rs. 22,33,694/- and referred the document to the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), Salem, the Second Respondent herein for the purpose of determining the market value. The Second Respondent after careful consideration of the market value determined by the Third Respondent herein and the original document of the subject land, fixed the market value at Rs. 2525/- per sq. ft., and directed the Appellant to pay a sum of Rs. 22,13,024/- Aggrieved by that order, the Appellant preferred an Appeal to the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration, the First Respondent herein. The said First Respondent fixed the value at Rs. 2582/- per sq. ft. Aggrieved by the that order, the Appellant filed the present Appeal.

(3.) The learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant vehemently contended that the order passed by the First Respondent, enhancing the market value fixed by the Second Respondent from Rs. 2525 to 2582/-per sq. ft., is illegal without any basis and justification as there is no power under the Act to enhance the market value. He further contended that the First Respondent ought not to have relied on the guideline value for the purpose of fixing the market value at Rs. 2582/- the guideline value is not the market value and in support of his contention he has also relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of R. Sai Bharathi v. J. Jayalalitha, 2004 SCC(Cri) 377 and V.N. Devadoss v. The Chief Revenue Control Officer- cum-Ins. and Ors., 2009(3) RCR(Civil) 496:, 2009(4) R.A.J. 274;, 2009 (3) L W 236. In view of the above, the order passed by the First Respondent is not in accordance with law and the same has to be set aside.