Mohit Kumar Shah, J. – This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 16.07.2022, passed by the respondent no.3, i.e. the Assistant Inspector General of Registration, Saran Division at Chapra, in Case No. 43 of 2022, whereby and where under the petitioner has been directed to deposit additional stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 2,02,737/-, in connection with registration of sale deed dated 05.03.2019.

2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner had purchased piece of land, having an area of 0.573 decimal, appertaining to Khata No.589, Survey Plot No.1399 and 4.109 decimal, appertaining to Khata No.501, Survey Plot No.1397, situated at Dahiyanwan Tola, Town Thana, District-Chapra for a sale consideration of Rs. 37,50,000/-, vide registered sale deed dated 05.03.2019, for which the petitioner had paid a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- as Stamp Duty and a sum of Rs. 76,050/-, as the registration charges. The sale deed, after registration was delivered to the petitioner on 05.03.2019 itself, after the registering authority i.e. the District Sub-Registrar, District Registration Office, Saran at Chapra was satisfied that the classification of the property and its market value, said forth in the sale deed, are correct. Nonetheless, subsequently, suspicion was raised regarding wrong classification as also non-disclosure of the correct market value of the aforesaid property in question, whereupon reference was made by the respondent no.05 on 12.05.2022, whereafter, the respondent no. 3 had instituted a Stamp Case No. 43 of 2022 and passed the impugned order dated 16.07.2022, asking the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 2,02,737/-.

3. The Ld. counsel for the petitioner has referred to Section 47 (A) (1) and (3) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘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.

Provided that where the market value of the property of the instruments described above has been fixed at an amount which is not less than the value prescribed in the Guide Line Register of estimated minimum value prepared under the rules framed under the provisions of this Act, but the registering officer has reasons to believe that the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument has not been rightly set forth or it is higher than the estimated minimum value, he after registering such instrument, shall refer it by assigning proper reasons to the Collector for determination of proper market value of the 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 as to the correctness of the market value of the property which is the subject matter of such instrument and the duty payable thereon and if, after such examination, he has reason to believe that the market value of such property, has not been rightly set forth in the instrument (or is less than even the minimum value determined in accordance with any Rules made under this Act), he may determine the market v