BINDU SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE short point involved in this writ petition is as to whether stamp duty can be charged on any such property which has been unauthorizedly and/or illegally occupied by the petitioner, which is beyond the area for which the sale deed had been executed.

(2.) THE brief facts of this case are that the petitioner had, vide sale deed dated 17-10-2002, purchased a plot of land measuring 36 meters, for a sum of Rs. 1. 50 lacs. On the said transaction, the petitioner had paid the requisite stamp duty as per the existing circle rate fixed by the Collector, according to which the valuation of the property came to Rs. 1. 77 lacs. Up till this point there was no dispute with regard to payment of stamp duty. Subsequently in the year 2005, a complaint was lodged to the effect that the petitioner had occupied the adjoining area and made certain constructions beyond the portion of land which had been purchased by him. An enquiry was got conducted and a report had been submitted that the petitioner had made constructions on such land beyond the area purchased by him. The petitioner submitted his objections. Thereafter, the Additional District Magistrate, (F and r), Hamirpur, Respondent No. 3 passed an order dated 31-12-2005 levying additional stamp duty as well as penalty with interest on the petitioner, after taking the area which had been occupied by him illegally also into consideration as the area for which the sale deed had been executed. Challenging the said order, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Commissioner, Chitrakoot Dham, respondent No. 2 which was dismissed vide order dated 23-6-2006. Aggrieved by the said orders, this writ petition has been filed.

(3.) I have heard Sri Jamal Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. Pleadings have been exchanged and with consent of the learned counsel for the parties, this writ petition is being disposed of at the admission stage.