In Court-ordered sales, stamp duty applies only to the sale consideration, not to market value, as established by the Transfer of Property Act.

1. Pleadings have been exchanged between the parties. Heard Sri C. K. Parekh, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Rakesh Kumar, learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

2. Sri C. K. Parekh, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the Civil Judge, Varanasi had appointed a Court Receiver in Execution Case No. 39 of 1956 (Rai Batuk Prasad Gupta Vs. Govind Prasad). According to him, earlier the properties of the judgement debtor were attached in the execution proceedings, whereafter the proceedings continued before the Court and the property remained in the custody of the Receiver. In Execution Case No. 39 of 1956 there were 32 decree holders. The Executing Court had by the order dated 30.08.1980 approved the sale and had recorded that the decree could be satisfied when the amounts to which the decree holders were entitled were paid to them by the purchasers (petitioners) and by the orders dated 26.04.1983 and 28.04.1983, the property was directed to be transferred in favour of the purchasers (petitioners). The aforesaid circumstances regarding execution of the sale deed by the Receiver in favour of the petitioner and payment of the debts to the decree holders was recorded in the sale deed. The sale consideration deposited by the petitioners was distributed amongst the decree holders and towards income tax by the Executing Court and therefore, the stamp duty paid on the said deposited amount is in accordance with law and the value of the property would be the sale consideration paid by the petitioners for satisfaction of the decree to be paid to the decree holders. As such the stamp duty is chargeable only on the said sale consideration and hence it does not come within the scope of S.47 - A of the Stamp Act. He states that such circumstance has been dealt with in S.24 of the Stamp Act.

3. Learned counsel states that the Deputy Stamp Commissioner, Varanasi by his order dated 9.4.1997 directed that the stamp duty should be paid on the value of Rs. 7,50,000/- since that was the value of the property when an earlier transaction had been made.

4. According to learned counsel the deficient stamp duty adjudged by the Deputy Stamp Commissioner, Varanasi in Case No. 386 of 1992-93 by his order dated 9.4.1997 was paid by the petitioner prior to filing the Revision No. 41 of 1997 (Lal Ji Agrawal and another Vs. State of U.P. and others) under S.56 (1) of the Indian Stamp Act before the Commissioner, Varanasi Division, Varanasi.

5. The Commissioner Varanasi Division, Varanasi has passed the impugned order dated 2.11.1998 where in he has set aside the order dated 9.4.1997 passed by the Deputy Stamp Commissioner and has remitted the matter for reassessment of the value of the property on the date of execution of sale deed on the basis of minimum circle rate.

6. According to Sri C. K. Parikh, learned counsel for the petitioners, transfer of immovable property in execution of a decree by the order of the Court is governed by S.2 (d) of the Transfer of Property Act which cannot be considered as conveyance as defined under S.2 (10) of the Stamp Act as such the provision of S.47 - A of the Stamp Act will not apply to such a sale deed. He