MANISH MATHUR
Umesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner Stamp Lko. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Mr. Upmanyu Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioners and learned State Counsel for opposite parties.
2. Both the petitions have been filed against order dated 07.02.2008 passed under Section 47A/33 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1899) whereby instrument of transfer of the property concerned has been found to be undervalued and, therefore, appropriate valuation along with penalty and interest has been imposed upon petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that so far as WRIT -C No. -1001426 of 2008 is concerned, the impugned order has been passed on an exparte basis without any notice to petitioner, Dr. Umesh Kumar Singh. It is submitted that although impugned order indicates notice having been issued to opposite parties but in fact notices were issued in other connected matters and not in the present case and since impugned order has been passed on ex parte basis, the same has been directly assailed in proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India without taking recourse to appellate proceedings under Section 56 of the Act of 1899. It is further submitted that this Court vide order dated 12.10.2022
K. Laxmanan v. Thekkayil Padmini and others reported in 2009(27) LCD 1344.
Lokman Singh v. Deputy General Manager U.P.S.R.T.C.
Pushpa Sareen v. State of U.P. and others reported in 2015(33) LCD 1575
Ram Khelawan @ Bachcha v. State of U.P. reported in (2005) 98 RD 511
State of U.P. and others v. Ambrish Tandon and another
Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trade Marks, Mumbai & others
The main legal point established in the judgment is the mandatory nature of statutory rules in property valuation under the Indian Stamp Act, particularly the requirement for prior notice before insp....
Procedural non-compliance in property valuation hearings renders resulting orders invalid, necessitating fresh proceedings to ensure parties are duly notified and allowed to participate.
Procedural fairness mandates that orders under the Indian Stamp Act cannot rely solely on ex-parte inspection reports without proper notice and inspection as per statutory rules.
The matter is remitted to the respondent no.2 or the competent authority who may be seized of the matter, to assess the market value taking into account the monetary consideration reflected in the ex....
An order based solely on an unauthorized officer's report lacks jurisdiction and must adhere to statutory procedures for validity.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.