The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fair and reasonable determination of stamp duty without imposing fines, and the duty of the Sub-Registrar to determine the market value and stamp duty payable before registration of the sale deed.

S.U. Khan, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. This writ petition is directed against order dated 16.12.2002 passed by Additional District Magistrate (F and R) Agra in Case No. 149 of 2002 Amir Bux v. Manju Tomar, under Stamp Act. Sale deed dated 5.10.2001 was impounded. Through the said order it was determined that through the sale deed an area of 1 bigha 1 biswa (equivalent to 2419 square meters) agricultural land was sold while in the area in, question the rate of abadi land was Rs. 1,100 per square meter. In the sale deed valuation of the property was shown to be Rs. 8 Lakhs. By the impugned order valuation was determined to be Rs. 26,60,900 and it was held that petitioner was liable to pay Rs. 1,86,100 as deficiency in stamp duty. Additional amount of Rs. 55,830 u/s 40B 40(1B)] of the Stamp Act and Rs. 1 Lakh as penalty was also required to be paid. In this manner petitioner was required to pay Rs. 3,41,930. Against the said order Revision No. 575 was filed. Commissioner, Agra Division, Agra allowed the revision in part and set-aside the penalty, in other respects order of A.D.M. was approved and it was also directed that 2% per month interest must also be paid. Said order has also been challenged through this writ petition.

3. Even though the area of the agricultural land sold was more than 1 bigha (pucca) still it was held to be abadi. In circle rates normally the minimum area is prescribed for treating the agricultural land to be agricultural. In the Impugned order it is not mentioned that for the relevant period in the circle rate what minimum area was prescribed for treating agricultural land to be agricultural. It has further been mentioned in the Impugned orders that for the area in question in the circle rates no rate is prescribed for agricultural land hence it will have to be treated as abadi. Petitioner has filed kliasra to show that agriculture was being carried out in the land in question comprised in plot No. 824. The property is situate in Mauza Sikandara Vahistabad district Azamgarh.

4. I have held in Ram Khelawan alias Bachcha Vs. State of U.P. and Prashant Shukla, (2005) 2 AWC 1087 that circle rates determined and circulated u/s 47A of Stamp Act and U.P. Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 are relevant only for initiating the proceedings u/s 47A of Stamp Act. However, while deciding the case no reliance can be placed upon the said circle rates and market value shall be determined on the basis of the general principles evolved by the Courts for the said purpose and particularly applied in determining market value in land acquisition cases. In the Impugned orders absolutely nothing has been stated that on what basis market value was determined to be @ Rs. 1,100 per square meter. Probably the said rate was mentioned in the circle rate for abadi land.

5. In normal course matter would have required remand. However, at the time of argument learned Counsel for the petitioner categorically agreed that in case this Court felt inclined to decide the matter finally then petitioner was ready to pay additional amount of Rs. 62,000 over and above the stamp duty paid by him (recorded in the order sheet on 22.8.2007). In my opinion, it would be in the interest of justice to conclude the matter finally by directing the petitioner to pay Rs. 62,000 (1/3 of the stamp deficiency determined by the impugned orders) more in respect of deed in question. This is being done particularly in view of the fact that absolutely no effort has been made by the A.D.M to determine the market value of the land in dispute on the basis of the general principles meant for the said purpose.

6. Accordingly petitioner is directed to deposit the aforesaid amount of Rs. 62,000 within three months from today positively. Apart from the aforesaid amount of Rs. 62,000 petitioner shall not be liable to pay any other amount for the deed in question. However, if petitioner has already deposited more than Rs. 62,000 then rest of the amou