RAJIV TANDON Vs. ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER ADMINISTRATION KANPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) P. K. Jain, J. Heard Sri Shyam Bahadur holding brief of Sri R. K. Saxena learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V. N. Agrawal learned standing counsel.

(2.) PETITIONER purchased a plot of land from respondent No. 3 and claiming that the respondent No. 3 was a registered society got the sale-deed registered without payment of required stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act. Respondent No. 2 exercising power of Collector, issued notice to the petitioner to show cause why he may not be directed to pay the required stamp duty. After hearing the petitioner and considering his objection, the respon dent No. 2 passed an order, dated 5-9-1980 holding that the petitioner has failed to establish that the society from whom the land was purchased was a registered society. The respondent No. 2, therefore, by the impugned order directed the petitioner to pay the stamp duty worth Rs. 665 and penalty amounting to Rs. 6,650. A revision was preferred before Respondent No. 1 which was dismissed by order dated 22-8-1992.

(3.) LEARNED counsel has not been able to show that the registration certificate or particulars thereof relating to respondent No. 3 were produced before the authority below. The question whether the society respondent No. 3 is actually the registered society is a question of fact and could not be gone into in exercise of powers under Article 226 of Constitution. But since now the petitioner has filed a copy of the registration certificate, the matter may be gone into by the respondent No. 2 after considering tie genuineness of the registration certificate.