RAMBABU AGARWAL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI P.C. Chandil, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri J.D. Suryavanshi, Government Advocate for the respondents. Petitioner, by this petition feels aggrieved by the orders, Annexure P/7 dated 4-5-2002 and Annexure P/8 dated 14-9-2002 by which respondent No. 3 has initiated proceedings for assessment of current market value of the property in question and payment of stamp duty on the sale deed in question accordingly. Shri P.C. Chandil, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the agreement for sale was entered into on 14-3-1984 for the shop in question and at the time of the agreement, the sale was for Rs. 50,000/- based on the value of the shop in question on the date of the agreement. Subsequently, when certain dispute arose with regard to implementation of the said agreement, a suit for specific performance was filed vide civil suit No. 14-A/86 which was later on renumbered as 209-A/94. The said suit was decreed on 8-12-1999. In this regard, Annexures P/3 and P/4 were placed on record.

(2.) WHEN the judgment-debtor did not comply with the decree, the petitioner filed an application for execution and during the process of execution proceedings, proposed sale deed and map of shop was prepared vide Annexure P/5 and executed sale deed for Rs. 50,000/- on 29-11-2001 vide Annexure P/6. The proper stamp duty on the basis of the aforesaid value was affixed on the sale deed and the same were presented for registration before the respondent No. 2. It is the case of petitioner that the said respondent refused to register the document and accept the registration fee. Instead it was recorded in the minutes book prepared at serial No. 606 on 1-12-2001 that proper market value has not been assessed for the property in question. On the basis of the aforesaid, the matter has been referred to the Collector, Stamps vide Annexure P/7 and a show cause notice, Annexure P/8 has been issued by the Collector of Stamps for the purpose of assessing the current market value for the property in question and payment of the stamp duty accordingly.

(3.) IN that view of the matter, the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the respondent/authorities have committed material irregularity in assessing the current market value of the property at Rs. 70,495/- vide Annexure P/7 which is unsustainable. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of S.P. Padmavathi v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, AIR 1997 Madras 296, judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Sub-Registrar, Kodad Town and Mandal v. Amaranaini China Venkata Rao (died) and others, AIR 1998 AP 252 and a judgment of the Patna High Court in the case of Smt. Shanti Devi Prasad and another v. The State of Bihar and others, AIR 2001 Patna 161.