Valuation for stamp duty must reflect the actual use of land at the time of sale, not speculative future potential, ensuring adherence to established guidelines and proper inspection.

JUDGMENT

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred against the order dated

27.08.2014 passed by Inspector General of Registration.

2. The brief facts are that the appellant is a Registered Society having Educational Institution. The Society had purchased properties under three sale deeds and the details are given below:

3. The sale deeds were referred to Special Deputy Collector (Stamps)

under section 47-A, wherein an order dated 10.09.2013 was passed fixing the Rs.

190/- per square feet. Aggrieved over the same the Society had preferred an appeal to the 1st respondent Inspector General of Registration. After perusing the documents and the report from the concerned authorities, the 1st respondent had passed the impugned order confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent.

Aggrieved over the same the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is preferred.

4. The primary contention of the appellant is that the valuation adopted by the respondents is not based on any comparative statistical data but instead based on their own arbitrary estimate. The total purchase of property is 40 acres, in which 37 acres still retains its agriculture character. Only in 3 acres there is building and the same is an abortive industrial venture and even now the construction is not complete and the construction occupies only 10% of land. Moreover, the area is surrounded by water bodies on three sides and the entire locality remains undeveloped. When the appellant had purchased larger extent of 40 acres and there are no plots of small size, hence the land ought to be valued as “agricultural land per acre” and not “residential area per square feet”. Moreover, the appellant had included the value of movable like generators, power panel and electrical materials that are lying with contractors in “other value” in Doc. No. 1329/2013 amount to Rs.4,31,09,000/-, which would show the transparency is the sale and the appellant never intended to undervalue the property for registration purposes.

5. The said contention of the appellant is refuted by the Learned Additional Advocate General and submitted that the rate is fixed as Rs.190 per square feet after taking all the factors into consideration. Infact earlier the report of the inspection authority suggested Rs.350/- per square feet, but after considering the construction in a portion of land and agricultural nature of the remaining lands the 2nd respondent had fixed the same as Rs.190/- and the same is confirmed by the 1st respondent. Further the Learned Additional Advocate General had relied on the Circular dated 06.01.2007 issued by the 1st respondent. In the said Circular it has been clarified how to fix the value for lands when the nearby plots are registered as housing plots but the land is sold as agricultural. The relevant portion is extracted hereunder:

“14) rhHgjpthsuhy; kidapl kjpg;gpy; fzf;fpl;L mDgg; g;gl;L tptrha epyk; vd epyj;jpd; jd;ik css; epiyapy; tptrha epy kjpg;gpid epHzak; nra;a jdpj;Jiz Ml;rpaUfF; gjpTj;Jiw jiytH Miz vz;: 48497/ vy1; /2003/12.11.2003-y; Mizapl;bUe;Jk; jdpj;Jiz Ml;rpahplkpUe;J kid kjpg;ghf re;ij kjpg;G epHzak; nra;Ak; epiyapy; K.r.gphpT 47V(5)-d; fPo; Nky;KiwaPL nra;ag;gLk; tof;Ffspy; ,l MaT; mwpf;iffs; Nfhug;gLk; NghJ tprhuiz mYtyHfs; ,tt; ptuq;fis fz;lwpe;J gpu];jhg rHNt vz;zpw;F kid kjpgG; Vw;gll; tpjk; kw;Wk; mjpYs;s gjpTg; Gs;sp tptuq;fs; Mfpatwi; w njspthf tpsf;fp mwpf;if mDgg; Ntz;Lk;. xU rHNt vzz; py; kid kjpg;gpy;

gjpTfs;