SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 2348

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SUBHASH VIDYARTHI, J.
Man Singh Rawat - Appellant
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko And 6 Others - Respondents
Writ C No.5499 of 2024
Decided on : 12-09-2024

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Kamlesh Singh, Manjusha Kapil
For the Respondent: C.S.C.

The nature of land is determined by its potential use and prior registrations, with presumption of residential use upheld.

Headnote:(A) Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Sections 47A and 56(1A) - Challenge to orders regarding deficiency in stamp duty - Petitioner ordered to pay deficient court fee and penalty for a sale deed - The property was found to have potential for non-agricultural use, justifying the valuation - No illegality found in the orders passed by the authorities. (Paras 2, 4, 6, 9)

(B) Nature of Land - Determination of land use based on previous registrations and inspections - Presumption of residential potential established by prior sales of the same khasra. (Paras 6, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner purchased land on 30.03.2019 for Rs. 14 lakh, assessed market value at Rs. 14,54,400/- and paid Rs. 1,02,000/- as stamp duty. A subsequent inspection revealed the land was not agricultural and had potential for residential use, leading to a deficiency notice.

Findings of Court:
The court found no illegality in the orders regarding the deficiency in stamp duty and upheld the valuation based on the land's potential use.

Issues: The main issues were the determination of the land's nature and the validity of the orders regarding stamp duty deficiency.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the nature of land is determined by its potential use and prior registrations, affirming that the presumption of residential use was valid.

Result: Petition dismissed.

JUDGMENT :

Subhash Vidyarthi, J.

1. Heard Sri Kamlesh Singh, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Hemant Kumar Pandey, the learned Standing Counsel representing all the respondents.

2. By means of the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged validity of an order dated 17.02.2021 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Stamp-I in Case No. 12644 of 2019, under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, whereby it has been held that there was deficiency in payment of stamp duty on a sale deed dated 30.03.2019 executed and registered in favour of the petitioner, to the tune of Rs. 3,91,430/-. The petitioner has been ordered to pay the aforesaid deficient court fee along with penalty of Rs. 10,570/-and interest thereon at the rate of 1.5% per month. The petitioner has also challenged validity of an order dated 18.07.2023 passed by the Deputy Commissioner Stamp (Lucknow) in Case No. 2004 of 2021, under Section 56(1A) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 whereby the appeal filed against the aforesaid order dated 17.02.2021 has been dismissed and the order has been affirmed.

4. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner had purchased 0.101 hectare land which was a part of land bearing khasra no. 744 situated at Village Sarsawan, Tehsil Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow, through a sale deed which was registered on 30.03.2019, for a sale consideration of Rs. 14 lakh. The petitioner assessed the market value of the property to be Rs. 14,54,400/-and accordingly paid stamp duty amounting to Rs. 1,02,000/- only.

5. After registration of the sale deed, the Sub-Registrar inspected the property in question and submitted a report to the Assistant Commissioner Stamp-I, Lucknow along with his letter dated 18.07.2019, upon which a stamp case was registered. It is recorded in the order dated 17.02.2021 that upon issuance of notice of the case to the petitioner, the petitioner appeared through counsel and gave an application dated 04.09.2020 for conducting inspection of the property in question again in his presence but thereafter the petitioner and his counsel did not appear in the proceedings. Still, the property in question was inspected again in presence of the petitioner and in the inspection report submitted by the Sub Registrar on 08.12.2021, it was stated that no sign was found regarding any agricultural activity being carried on the land in question either in present or in near past. The land in question was not agricultural land. Deeds registered at serial no. 4027/14, 2627/15 and 6779/15 had been registered previously regarding separate portion of the same khasra no. 744, regarding all of which stamp duty was paid on residential rates.

6. In appeal also, the Assistant Commissioner has recorded that the appellant or his counsel were not appearing on consecutive dates and it appeared that the petitioner merely wanted to keep the proceedings pending and did not want its disposal. Therefore, the appeal was decided after hearing submissions of the learned DGC (Revenue), holding that some other portions of land in question forming a part of the same khasra have already been treated as residential lands is relevant for deciding the nature of land. Upon inspection, the land was found not being used for agricultural purposes and it had immediate potential for being used for non-agricultural/ residential purposes. Therefore, the valuation of land treating it to be non-agricultural was proper.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the appurtenant plots of land were small plots which were being used for residential purposes whereas the land purchased through the sale deed in question measures 0.101 hectare which is a large plot of land and which indicates that the land has not been purchased for residential purposes.

8. The area of land will not be determinative of the nature of land. When separate portion of khasra no. 744 have been sold through different

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top