JUDGMENT :

Piyush Agrawal, J.

Heard Shri Rahul Sripat, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Shri Ishir Sripat, learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Archana Tyagi, learned standing counsel for the State - respondents.

2. The present writ petition has been filed for the following, amongst other, relief:-

“i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 28.01.2010 passed by Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U.P., Allahabad (Circuit Court at Meerut) in Stamp Appeal No. 09 of 2007-08; M/s G.T.M. Builders & Promoters (P) Ltd. Versus State of U.P. (Annexure No. 8).”

3. It is averred in the writ petition that M/s Modipon Fibres Company (a division of Modipon Limited) claimed to have held land measuring 201 bighas, 6 biswas situated in Village - Bishokher, Aurangabad, Gadana and Begumabad Gadana in the District - Ghaziabad. The said land was alleged to have been transferred to M/s Modipon Fibres Company by the State Government vide transfer deed dated 01.08.1994. The petitioner entered into an agreement dated 19.01.2006 to purchase the land in question from M/s Modipon Fibres Company. M/s Modipon Fibres Company was permitted to sell the land vide order dated 10.08.2001 by the State Government. It is further averred that some dispute arose between the parties and the possession of the land was never delivered to the petitioner. It is further averred that a photocopy of the deed dated 19.01.2006 was submitted by the Assistant Commissioner of Stamps to the Collector, Ghaziabad on 21.04.2006 for levy of stamp duty. Consequently, the Collector registered a case under section 33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (registered as Case No. 17 of 2006-07) and was transferred to the Assistant Commissioner of Stamps, Ghaziabad vide order dated 03.06.2007.

4. It is further stated that on 16.06.2006, a notice under sections 17, 27, 33, 40, 47-A & 64 of the Indian Stamp Act read with rules 7, 8, 9 & 10 of the U.P. Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules, 1997 was issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Stamps to the petitioner. Pursuant to the notice, the petitioner submitted its reply/objection.

5. The Assistant Commissioner of Stamps, vide order dated 27.09.2007, held that the petitioner is liable to pay the stamp duty in accordance with the Schedule I-B at Serial No. 5 of the Indian Stamp Act and also imposed penalty. Aggrieved by the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Stamps, the petitioner preferred Stamp Appeal No. 9 of 2007 before the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U.P. (CCRA) under section 56(I-A) of the Indian Stamp Act. During the pendency of the appeal, recovery citation dated 20.11.2007 was issued against the petitioner. Aggrieved petitioner, filed Writ Petition No. 483 of 2008 before this Court, which was disposed of vide order dated 05.11.2009 directing the appellate authority to decide the stamp appeal within three months.

6. Pursuant to the order of this Court, the appellate authority has passed an order dated 28.01.2010 dismissing the stamp appeal of the petitioner. Hence, this writ petition.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner entered into Memorandum of Understanding with M/s Modipon Fibres Company, which was never acted upon as M/s Modipon Fibres Company was not vested with the right to transfer the property. It is further submitted that against M/s Modipon Fibres Company, Original Suit No. 150 of 2001 was pending before the Debt Recovery Tribunal and therefore, the Company cannot sell the land without the permission of the Debt Recovery Tribunal, Delhi. It is further submitted that within 15 days from the date of Memorandum of Understanding dated 19.01.2006, the petitioner and M/s Modipon Fibres Company were to jointly measure the land and required to record the exact measurements in the Memorandum to be signed by them.

8. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the notice, which has been issued on 17.06.2007, never called for the original deed,