JUDGMENT :

[Saurabh Lavania, J.]

1.Heard Sri Mudit Agarwal, Advocate assisted by Ms. Shagun Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rajesh Tewari, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State of U.P.

In the present petition, a challenge has been made to the order dated 15.12.2004 passed by opposite party No. 3-Additional Commissioner (Judicial), Lucknow Division, Lucknow in Revision No. 123/201-02. A challenge has also been made to the order dated 24.7.2002 passed by the opposite party No. 4-Up Zila Adhikari, Biswan, District Sitapur, in a stamp case No. 1/17/1987.

2. By the order dated 24.7.2002 passed by the opposite party No. 4, in a proceedings initiated under Section 47(A) of the Stamp Act, after holding that the land in issue i.e. Plot/Gata No. 403 area 0.295 has been purchased for industrial and commercial purposes, the petitioner was directed to deposit/remove the deficiency of stamp on the document i.e. registered sale-deed dated 28.10.1999, which was executed in favour of the petitioner by Santosh Kumar, Lalta Prasad and Som Kumar. This order was assailed by the petitioner in the revision No. 1/17/1987, as provided under Section 56 of Stamp Act, which was dismissed by the order impugned herein dated 15.12.2004.

3. Assailing the orders impugned in the present petition, the learned counsel for the petitioner, based upon the pleadings and documents on record, submitted that the petitioner purchased the agricultural land Plot/Gata No. 403 area 0.295 situated in village Jhajhar, Pargana and Tehsil Biswan, District Sitapur, from Santosh Kumar, Lalta Prasad and Som Kumar son of Sri Shiv Dayal. For the purposes of execution and registration of the sale-deed, the requisite stamp duty, as per the circle rate prescribed by the Collector, was paid. The stamp duty which was paid was to the tune of Rs. 9,360/-.

4. It is also stated that land in issue was purchased for agricultural purposes particularly for cultivation of sugar cane, as the petitioner is the sugar factory. The fact that land in issue was purchased for cultivation of sugar cane can also be deduced from page 13 of the sale-deed dated 28.10.1999, as also from the fact that the land in issue is bounded as East- agriculture land of Lav Khush, West- the land of Shanker Dayal, North- Nala & agriculture land of Haresh Bihari and Bipin Bihari and in South- agriculture land of Smt. Geeta Seksaria.

5. It is also submitted that after purchasing the land in issue, the petitioner preferred an application for mutation under Section 34 of U.P. Land Revenue Act, 1901. In this case, an adverse order was passed, as such, the petitioner preferred an appeal and thereafter, in compliance of order dated 29.1.2001 passed in appeal, the name of the petitioner was recorded in the revenue record. Thereafter, a notice dated 25.5.2001 under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 was served on the petitioner and in response to the same, the petitioner submitted an objection dated 7.7.2001. During the pendency of the proceedings, the opposite party No. 4 called for a report from the Nagar Palika Parishad, Biswan. As per the report of Nagar Palika Parishad, Biswan dated 5.9.2001, the land in issue i.e. plot No. 403 is not situated within the boundaries of Nagar Palika Parishad, Biswan. A report was also called from concerned Tehsildar and as per the report of Tehsildar dated 26.6.2002, the land is situated within the limit of Nagar Palika Parishad, Biswan and in this report a specific observation has also been made by the concerned Tehsildar that land has been purchased for industrial/commercial purpose.

6. He further submitted that the observation in the report that the land in issue has been purchased for industrial/commercial purposes is based on presumption/surmises, as the land in issue, as per the boundaries indicated in the sale-deed, is not adjacent to sugar factory in the same vicinity. Further stated that petitioner against the report of Tehsildar dated 26.