SMT. PARMILLA DEVI Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Rajendra Prasad Rai, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S.K. Upadhayay, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner in the writ petition is seeking quashing of the orders dated 31.10.2002 and 24.5.2003 passed in proceedings under the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act, 1899).

(3.) The petitioner purchased the property in dispute i.e. plot no. 109 area 620 Kadi for a sum of Rs. 1,29,000/- through a sale deed dated 202002. Proceedings under section 47A of the Act, 1899 were initiated alleging that there was deficiency of stamp duty. The petitioner filed her objection. In the report which was submitted by the Tehsildar dated 30.4.2002, it is mentioned that on the plot in dispute in an area of 150ft x 40 ft, there is a foundation which is 4ft high and in the remaining part wheat is sown. The land is adjacent to the road and the market is only 500mtr. away. Out of the same plot no. 109, a portion measuring area 280 Kadi has been sold to one Ramwati W/o Prem Narayan through a similar sale deed dated 26.02002. In the report of the Tehsildar, it is stated that on that land also there was construction and that construction has been used as exemplar treating the land for residential purposes @ Rs. 700/- per sq. metre. Therefore, the market value of the property @ Rs. 700/- per sq. metre has been calculated at Rs. 17,58,000/- on which stamp duty has been determined at Rs. 1,40,640/-. The petitioner had already paid Rs. 10,320/- as stamp duty and therefore, deficiency of stamp duty has been calculated at Rs. 1,30,320/- plus registration charges at Rs. 2,420/-. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the land in question which was purchased, was agricultural land, therefore, stamp duty could only have been computed treating the land as agricultural land and not residential land.