Back
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. SUDHAKAR
Ezhilarasi & Another
Versus
The Inspector General of Registration & Others
C.M.A.No. 2418 and 2419 of 2008
Decided On : 05-11-2008
(B) Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899)-Sec.47A-Undervaluation of document-Guideline value-Cannot be taken as market value.
The Guideline value, as such, cannot be the market value. Para 9
Guideline value is not a final authority on the market value of the property. Para 11
(C) Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899)-Sec.47A-Undervaluation of document-Market value-Determination-Various parameters as per the rules to be considered to decide market value.
The Department will have to go by the various parameters set down in the Rules for determination of the market value if they have a reasonable belief that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth in the instrument. In other words the data land which is sought to be compared in this case should contain details which will throw light as to how the data land, its nature, extent and value is comparable to that of the property which is subject matter of registration. Para 11
The true market value if at all can be fixed only on the basis of data which has to be furnished and analysed in terms of the Rules. Such exercise has to be done by the respondents by following the procedure prescribed as per law. Para 14
(D) Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (2 of 1899)-Sec.47A-Undervaluation of document-Burden of proof-Onus is on department to prove undervaluation.
The onus is on the Department to establish that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth and the market value as claimed by the Department is contemporaneous to the document tendered for registration. Para 11
Two appeals have been filed by the petitioners challenging the order of the first respondent upholding the order of the second respondent.
2. The brief facts are- as follows: C.M.A.No.2418 of 2008:-
(i) The appellant Ezhilarasi purchased 0.68 cents of agricultural land in Chidambaram Town, Ward No.4, Block No.6, T.S.No.555 at the rate of Rs.6.75 per square foot = Rs.2,943/- per cent. The document was executed on 14. 1998 and presented on the same date (i.e.) on 14. 1998. It was registered as document No.484/2001 on 3. 2001. The value as per the instrument was Rs.2,00,000/-.
(ii) The respondent Department was of the view that the appellant has not set forth the true market value of the property in the instrument. Therefore, proceedings were initiated under Section 47A of the Indian Stamps Act read with Tamil Nadu Stamps (Prevention of Undervaluation of Instrument) Rules 1968 (herein after referred to as The Act and The Rules). Form-I notice was issued on 19. 2001 in C.P.No.2644/2001-02. The Department initially contended that the guideline value was Rs.253.50 per square foot. Appellant submitted her objections to the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) and pleaded that the true market value has been declared. Considering the objections raised, the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) fixed the market value of the property at Rs.18,000/- per cent = Rs.41.28 per square foot. The deficit stamp duty was demanded on the differential value.
(iii) Aggrieved by the order of Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), the second respondent herein, an appeal was filed to the first respondent, the Inspector General of Registration. When the appeal was pending before the authority, the appellate authority was of the view that the actual market value of the property was Rs.18,16,900/-per acre = Rs.18,169/- per cent. He was guided by the inspection report dated 6. 2003 and the three documents of sale of the years 1995, 1996 and 2000. The District Registrar also opined that the market value of the property was Rs.18,16,900/-per acre = Rs.41.67 per square foot. Therefore, a notice dated 29. 2003 was issued to the appellant to show-cause as to why the market value of the property should not be fixed at Rs.18,16,900/- per acre. A final notice was also issued to the appellant and the first respondent passed the impugned order fixing the market value of the property at Rs.18,16,900/- per acre = Rs.18,169/-per cent = Rs.41.67 per square foot. On the differential value, stamp duty was demanded by the Department. Aggrieved thereby the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed.
3. C.M.A.No.2419 of 2008:-
(i) The appellant Kaliaperumal, purchased the agricultural land to an extent of 0.53 cents in Kothangudi village in Survey No.11/3 and the property falls within the jurisdiction of the third respondent herein. The vendor signed and executed the sale document on 112. 1997 and was presented for registration on 2. 1998. The property was, however, registered on 20.6.2000 as document No.1485/2000. The value of the document was Rs.1,00,000/- = Rs.1,886/- per cent = Rs.4.33 per square foot.
(ii) Proceedings were initiated by the Department in terms of Section 47-A of the Indian Stamps Act stating that the market value of the property has not been truly set forth in the instrument. Form-I notice was issued on 19. 2001 in C.P.No.2643/2001-02. According to the Department, the guideline value of the property was Rs.25.70 per square foot. The appellant objected to the valuation as contended by the Department and the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) fixed the value at Rs.20/- per square foot = Rs.8,720/- per cent or Rs.8,72,000/-per acre. As per the order of the Deputy Collector (Stamps), the market value of the property sought to be registered would be Rs.4,62,160/-.
(iii) Aggrieved by the order of the Deputy Collector (Stamps), the second respondent, appellant filed an appeal before the Inspector General of Registration, the first respondent herein. The appellate
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
