K SIVARAMAIAH Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR URBAN CUDDAPAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Admittedly the appellant purchased the property at the auction held in public by the Managing Trustee of Sri Shantilingeswara Swamy Temple, Pullampet on 16-10-1981 for a total consideration of Rs. 36,200/-. The instrument of conveyance in that behalf was registered on 2-9-1983 afcer confirmation of the sale was accorded by the Commissioner for Endowments On the ground that the market value of the property was undervalued in the instrument the Sub-Registrar, Pullampet, in whose office the instrument is registered made a reference to the Collector, Cuddapah district for determination of the market value of the said property under Section 47-A of the Indian STAMP ACT, 1899, whereupon the Collector determined the market value of the property at Rs. 1,66,980/-, and levied a total duty of Rs. 16, 699/-. The petitioner unsuccessfully preferred an appeal before the learned Subordinate Judge, Rajampet. The above revision petition was therefore filed assailing both the orders of the Collector, Cuddapah district and the learned Subordinate Judge, Rajampet.

(2.) Section 27-A of the Act empowers the registering officer appointed under the Registration Act to make a reference to the Collector for determination of the market value of the property conveyed under an instrument where he has reason to believe that the market value has not been truly setforth in the instrument. The object underlying Section 47 of the Indian STAMP ACT, 1899 is to neutralise the effect of undervaluation of the immovable property conveyed under registered instruments of sale, or exchange, or gift, or partition, or settlement. In the instant case there could be no question of undervaluation of the property as the property was sold in public auction in favour of the appellant. The expression used as "truly" and not "properly" or "correctly'. The consideration, the appellant parted with for purchase of the property, it is not denied was truly setforth in the instrument. It therefore, follows that the reference made by the Sub Registrar, Pullampet is bad.

(3.) I, therefore, set aside both the impugned orders of the Collector, Cuddapah district and the learned Subordinate Judge, Rajampet. The revision petition is accordingly allowed. No costs.