MOHIT KUMAR JALAUN Vs. COMMISSIONER JHANSI DIVISION JHANSI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) RAJESH Kumar, J. By means of present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 11-11-2004 passed by the Commissioner, Jhansi Division, Jhansi in Appeal No. 21 of 2003-04, Mohit Kumar v. State of U. P. , under Section 56 of Indian Stamp Act.

(2.) BY the aforesaid order, the respondent No. 1 has confirmed the order passed by the respondent No. 2, by which, he has determined the deficiency of stamp duty at Rs. 35,890 and imposed a penalty at Rs. 71,780/ -.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that before the Appellate Authority, it was submitted that in Khasra and Kisan Bahi on the date of execution of the sale-deed, both the Gatas were shown as unirrigated land. He submitted that near the disputed land, there was no Nahar or Pull. It was also submitted that the respondent No. 2 in his order referred about the inspection dated 11-7-2004, but no notice or any information has been given to the petitioner about the said inspection and thus, treating the land in dispute as irrigated land on the basis of inspection, is wholly unjustified. He submitted that the levy of penalty is also erroneous. He further submitted that the respondent No. 1 has heard the argument on 30- 9-2004 and directed to put up the file for decision on 7-10-2004, but on several dates, the judgment could be delivered and finally on 11-11-2004, order has been passed. He submitted that the order passed by the respondent No. 1 after a gap of more than two months after hearing the case, is not justified. LEARNED Standing Counsel submitted that in pursuance of the order of Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U. P. at Allahabad, the respondent No. 2 had made spot inspection and found that both the land were irrigated and adjacent to the land Nahar and Naali were found and thus, the order of the respondent No. 2 confirmed by the respondent No. 1, cannot be said to be unjustified.