STATE OF PUNJAB Vs. KHARATI LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The vendor/respondent-Darshan Singh sold 0 - 13-1/4 marlas of land, vide sale deed No. 3522 dated 24.07.1989, for a consideration of Rs. 25,000/-. The sale deed was registered. Thereafter, the Sub Registrar, Mansa, informed the Collector that the sale deed had been got registered at an under valued price. Vide order dated 28.02.1990, the Additional Deputy Commissioner, Bathinda (exercising the power of Collector, Bathinda) ordered the respondents to pay deficit fee of Rs. 45,000/- on a finding that the sale deed was priced at a price lesser than fixed by the relevant District Committee.

(2.) In an appeal, the then learned Additional District Judge, Bathinda set aside the order passed by the Collector by holding that the guidelines relied upon by the Collector are invalid as being violative of the provisions of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act and those (guidelines) are not permissible under the Registration Act. Reliance in support of the view obtained was placed upon Chamkaur Singh and another v. The State of Punjab and another, 1991 AIR(P&H) 26 , Sri Kishan Jindal v. Registrar Patiala, 1982 AIR(P&H) 266and Himalaya House v. C.C.R.A., 1972 AIR(SC) 899.

(3.) I have not been persuaded to differ from the view obtained by the learned First Appellate Court. Apart therefrom, the reference made by the Sub Registrar was not competent in view of the fact that the sale deed had already been registered.