VEENA RANI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ms. Tanisha Peshawaria, DAG, Haryana appearing for the respondent-State has reported compliance of the order dated 15.10.2012 passed by this Court imposing costs of Rs. 10,000/-. The costs stand paid vide treasury receipt No. 79 dated 29.01.2013. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, this matter is remanded to the Collector, Hisar to pass a fresh order under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. 1899 (for short "the Act") to redetermine the market value or consideration and the duty payable on sale of SCO No. 144, Commercial Urban Estate-I, Hisar of a plot measuring 115 square yards. The shop has been purchased by the petitioner from vendor Hari Nath Mehta son of Sh. Bhagwan Dass, R/o. Village Kharkera, Sub Tehsil Barwala, District Hisar. Agreement to sell between the parties was executed on 10.12.2004. The date of the sale deed is 02.03.2007. The price worked out by the Collector for the SCO No. 144, Commercial Urban Estate-I, Hisar of a plot measuring 115 square yards was Rs. 30,45,500/- whereas the sale deed was sought to be registered at Rs. 4 lacs. A deficiency of stamp duty in a sum of Rs. 1,58,730/- and Rs. 14,000/- on account of registration fees has been found due and payable on account of undervaluation. The Collector's order has been upheld in appeal. These orders have been impugned in this petition.

(2.) The authorities below have gone exclusively by Collector rates to determine market value of property for the locality in question. The authorities below have determined the land in dispute at Rs. 16,000/- per square yard without making any enquiry under Section 47-A of the Act. The price has to be determined on the date when the papers were submitted for registering the sale deed in March 2007. It is not disputed that the property in question falls at serial No. 182 of the proposed rates of land/plots issued by the Collector within the municipal limits of Hisar for the year 2004-05 in the locality called Red Square Market Old Jail. The previous rate has been recorded at Rs. 13,000/- and the proposed rate at Rs. 16,000/- per square yard.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that collector rates alone are not determinative of market value of land. He submits that sub-Section 2 of Section 47-A of the Act read with Rule 5(1) of the Haryana and Stamp (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1978 imposes a mandatory duty on the Collector to hold an enquiry in the manner prescribed by the rules and also give reasonable opportunity to the parties before making determination of the value of the land. A vendee has a right to ask for opportunity to lead evidence in rebuttal to the evidence collected by the authority against him. If the determination is made contrary to the procedure established by law, the order cannot be sustained as it would be arbitrary and against the rule of law. He relies on a Division Bench decision of this Court rendered in Naresh Kumar and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2004 4 RCR(Civ) 217 to urge that collector rates may be used only as prima facie material to alert the authority regarding the value of land but it cannot in itself with the sole determining factor-plus or minus, and an independent enquiry is required to be held. The orders passed by the Collector must satisfy the tests of orders of a quasi judicial authority, where such orders are subject to judicial review by the High Court for the Court to know reasons on the basis of which conclusions have been recorded.