Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 30.11.2022, passed by the respondent no. 3 i.e. the Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga in Stamp Case No. 207 of 2022-23, whereby and whereunder the petitioner has been directed to deposit deficit stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 1,70,316/- along with penalty to the tune of Rs. 17,032/- i.e. totalling to a sum of Rs. 1,87,348/-.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the father-in-law of the petitioner gifted the land in question, details whereof has been furnished in paragraph no. 4 of the present writ petition as also in the registered gift deed, by means of a gift deed which was registered on 20.07.2020. It appears that after verification by the registering authority and payment of the due stamp duty, the gift deed was registered on 20.07.2020, nonetheless, upon a complaint made by the brother of the petitioner on 30.09.2022, the respondent no. 3 had issued a letter dated 07.10.2022 to the District Sub-Registrar, Kisanpur, District-Samastipur to enquire into the matter, whereupon it transpired that deficit stamp duty has been paid by the petitioner. Thereafter, the respondent no. 3 had initiated Stamp Case No. 207 of 2022-23 against the petitioner and then the impugned order dated 30.11.2022 was passed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised a legal issue to the effect that registering officer can refer a matter for determination of the proper market value of the property in question if he is satisfied that the classification of the property is wrong or the market value of the property has been set forth at a lower rate than the guideline register of estimated minimum value, only before registering the instrument in question. However, in the present case, the case has been registered after registration of the gift deed on 20.07.2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that even as per Section 47-A(3) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act, 1899”), the Collector has the power to suo motu call for the records of such instrument which has been registered and examine the same for the purposes of satisfying himself as to the correctness of the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument and the duty payable thereon, however, the same can only be done within a period of two years, but in the present case though the gift deed has been registered on 20.07.2022, however, the respondent no. 3 has initiated the process, purportedly under Section 47-A(3) of the Act, 1899, by issuing letter to the Sub-Registrar, Kisanpur, District-Samastipur, only on 07.10.2022 i.e. after expiry of two years, hence on this ground as well the impugned order dated 30.11.2022 is bad in law and is fit to be set aside.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to Section 47-A(1) & (3) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, which are reproduced herein below: –

“47-A (1) Where the registering officers appointed under the Registration Act, 1908 while registering any instrument of conveyance, exchange, gift, partition or settlement is satisfied that the classification of the property and/ or the measurement of the structure contained in the property which is subject matter of such instrument has been set forth wrongly or the market value of the property, which is subject matter of such instrument has been set forth at a lower rate than the Guideline Register of Estimated Minimum Value prepared under the rules framed under the provision of this Act, he shall refer such instrument before registering it to the Collector for determination of the proper market value of such property and the proper duty payable thereon.

47-A (3) The Collector may suo motu within two years from the date of registration of such instrument not already referred to him under sub-section (1) call for and examine the instrument for the purpose of satisfying himself