JUDGMENT :

1. This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 24.08.1098 Annexure 5 passed by respondent no. 1 – CCRA U.P / Board of Revenue at Allahabad and the order dated 14.06.1994 annexure no. 2 passed by respondent no. 2 i.e. Additional Collector (F&R), District Saharanpur, by which both the authorities have impounded the deed and imposed penalty for Rs.16,325/-directed to make the deficit and complete the deficiency of stamp duty of Rs.16,675/-. Total Rs. 33,000/-and directed to recover the same from the petitioner.

2. In brief, facts of the case are that the petitioner purchased one room on the ground floor of an area 23.24 Sq. Yard situated in Mohalla Railway Saharanpur for the consideration of Rs. 35,000/-and paid the stamp duty accordingly at the time of purchase of shop. After the execution of the sale-deed in question, the Sub Registrar referred the sale deed to respondent no. 2 for correct the valuation for stamp purposes with report that after spot inspection, it appears that the property exists in a posh locality has been purchased for commercial purposes and not for residential purposes. According to him Rs. 500/-per month may be the rent of the property in question. The monthly rent of the property is Rs. 100/- per month, as the petitioner was an old tenant.

3. Notice was issued to the petitioner to file objection (annexure no.1) dated 21.04.1994 before the respondent no. 2 with the allegation/objection that the adequate stamp duty was not paid by him. The property in question was in his tenancy at the time of purchase. The petitioner was not provided an opportunity to file objection against the report of the Sub Registrar and to produce the evidence. The report of the Sub-Registrar does not contains the correct facts and depicts incorrect picture of the spot.

4. The petitioner in support of the version, has filed a copy of the assessment of the year 1991-96, in which the annual rent of the property is shown as Rs.900/-. The respondent no. 2 without going into the depth of the case, rejected the objection and valued the property showing wrongly its monthly rent at Rs.5,00/-per month and valued the property in question at Rs.1,50,000/-showing the deficit of Rs.1,15,000/-on which stamp deficiency was shown Rs.16,675/-and imposed Rs.16,325/-as penalty total Rs. 33,000/-to be paid by the petitioner to the State of U.P. The judgment dated 14.06.1994 has been annexed as annexure no. 2 to this writ petition.

5. In the trial court, the petitioner filed an extract of Nagar Palika Parishad showing yearly valuation of the house in question. The petitioner was shown as tenant and the annual value was Rs 9,00/-. A copy of the Khasarafor the year w.e.f. 01.08.1991 to 31st March, 1997 has been filed as annexure no. 3.

6. The petitioner being aggrieved with the order of the respondent no. 2, filed a stamp revision Annexure No. IV under Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act before the respondent no. 1 on 20th July, 1994.

7. The respondent no. 1 on 24.08.1998 passed the judgment and order (annexure no. 5), and imposed stamp deficiency of Rs.16,675/-but set aside the penalty of Rs.16,325/-. The order of the respondent no. 1 was bad in the eyes of law. He has not applied the judicial mind and has recorded the finding, which is not tenable in law, he has not followed the directions given in Rule 341 of the Indian Stamp Rules and has wrongly assessed the property on his own accord without considering the principles laid down under Rule 341 of the Indian Stamp Rules. Existing a property in commercial area is no ground to say that the property which is purchased is for commercial purposes.

8. Respondent no. 1 has not applied the judicial mind and has not followed the order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in this connection only assessment of the house be considered for determining of the stamp duty. The respondent no. 1 has also wrongly fixed the monthly rent Rs.500/-without any evidence, exemplar or any rent receipt filed by