STATE OF U.P. Vs. VISWAMBHAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Standing Counsel for the petitioner-State and learned Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The three officers who had been appointed to inspect the property had given different valuations. Through Annexures-4 and 5 valuation was determined to be Rs. 1 crore if the property was used as cinema hall otherwise Rs. 2 crore if it was used for commercial purposes. However, the third officer i.e., Deputy Registrar in his report Annexure-6 had mentioned the valuation to be Rs. 3,23,17,266/-. Against the order dated 19.2.2004 respondents filed revision being stamp revision case No. 4 of 2004-2005. C.C.R.A./Board of Revenue, Allahabad allowed the revision in part through order dated 17.2.2005. The Re-visional Court held that an area of 500 sq. meters which abutted Ambala road should be valued @ of Rs. 5720/- per sq. meter and remaining area of 1150.58 sq. meter @ Rs. 3575 per sq. meter as per circle rate fixed by the Collector for non-commercial purposes as it was situate on only 12 feet wide road. Thus market value of the land came to Rs. 69,70,322. The 'ruined and dilapidated structure' was valued at Rs. 7,94,668/- (total valuation Rs. 77,64,990). Ultimately it was held that proper stamp duty payable was Rs. 7,76,499. Rs. 3,50,000/- stamp duty had already been paid on the sale-deed. Accordingly, respondents were directed to pay Rs. 4,26,499 more as deficiency in stamp duty.

(3.) The Deputy Commissioner Stamp in its order dated 19.2.2004 had held that the building was about 60 years old, however, it held that in view of Rule 5 of Stamp Rules of 1997 no depreciation was permissible in the building. Accordingly, it calculated the market value of the construction to be Rs. 48,00,000/- according to the rate fixed by the D.M. for the new construction. This view was utterly erroneous in law. In, Ram Khilawan v. State of U.P., 2005 98 RevDec 511I have held that Rules of 1997 are meant only to initiate the proceedings, however, while deciding the case matter has to be decided on the basis of the same principles which are applied while deciding the market value for the purposes of compensation under land acquisition Act. In any case determining market value of old super structure treating that to be recently made is preposterous.