CW1173/2012

// 1 //

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

BENCH AT JAIPUR

ORDER

IN

S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.1173/2012

With

Stay Application No.929/2012

Hindustan

Petroleum

Corporation

Limited Vs. The State of Rajasthan

and Others

Date of Order ::: 05.02.2013

Present

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Mohammad Rafiq

Shri Anant Kasliwal, counsel for petitioner

####

By the Court:-

This writ petition seeks to challenge order of

respondent no.2 – the Collector (Stamps) Circle-2,

Jaipur dated 20.10.2004 and that of respondent no.6 –

the Rajasthan Tax Board, Ajmer, dated 29.08.2011. By

the first order the Collector (Stamps) has held the

petitioner liable to pay the stamp duty on the land

measuring 796 square yards in front of petrol pump

being run by petitioner abutting the road, as

commercial. The Sub Registrar (Registration) Sawai

Madhopur required the petitioner to pay a sum of

Rs.1,26,480/- as stamp duty, Rs.8449/- as registration

charges and Rs.5071/- as penalty, thus a total sum of

Rs.1,40,000/-. The Rajasthan Tax Board upheld the order

of the Collector (Stamps), while dismissing the

revision petition preferred by the petitioner.

Factual matrix of the case is that the

petitioner purchased a land measuring 2518 square yard

from the same owner and presented two sale-deeds for

registration; one for the land measuring 1722 square

CW1173/2012

// 2 //

yard and another measuring 796 square yards, which were

respectively described as Plot A and Plot B. The stand

of the petitioner was that while the land covered by

Plot A has been converted into commercial, the land of

Plot B continues to be the agriculture land. The Sub

Registrar impounded the sale deed on the basis that the

deed was deficiently stamped and forwarded the same to

the Collector (Stamps) Circle 2, Jaipur under Section

47A(1) of the Rajasthan Stamps Act, 1998. The Collector

(Stamps) vide above referred order valued the sale-deed

at Rs.28,05,757/-, which was upheld by the Rajasthan

Tax Board. Aggrieved thereby, the petitioner has

approached this court by way of present writ petition.

Shri Anant Kasliwal, learned counsel for

petitioner, has argued that the land measuring 769

square yards covered by Plot B was unconverted

agriculture land and therefore the Collector (Stamps)

was wholly unjustified in treating the same as

commercial land and accordingly computing the stamp

duty. The land covered by Plot A has been converted

into commercial and therefore two separate sale deeds

were rightly presented by the petitioner. The Collector

(Stamps) has in utter disregard of the provisions

contained in Sections 47A and 65 of the Rajasthan Stamp

Act, 1998 and Rule 58 of the Rajasthan Stamp Rules,

2004 has wrongly came to the conclusion that the land

of Plot B is commercial in nature. Such a conclusion

has been arrived at by the Collector (Stamps) without

recording any evidence as to the actual market value of

the land.

Shri Anant Kasliwal, learned counsel for

petitioner, has sought to explain with the help of the

CW1173/2012

// 3 //

map of two plots enclosed with the sale-deed contending

that though the Plot B is situated in front of the land

of Plot A but that, by itself, does not describe its

nature. The land covered by Plot B has to be

essentially kept open because of the condition of the

Indian Road Congress according to which 100 feet from

the center of the road on either side has to be kept

open for possible widening of the high ways in future.

It is for this reason that the land abutting the high

ways was not converted by the government authorities.

This land therefore should continue be treated as

agriculture land and cannot be treated as commercial

land. It is argued that while assessing the market

value of the property, the respondent authorities were

required to take into consideration the evidence as to

location, neighbourhood as well as