Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) HEARD Shri K.M. Garg, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned standing counsel appearing for the State -respondents.
(2.) THE writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.7.1994 (Annexure 14 to the writ petition) passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, Nagina, District Bijnor and dated 3.7.1996 (Annexure 15 to the writ petition) passed by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, U.P., Allahabad whereby the valuation of the property of the petitioner has been assessed to Rs.8 Lacs and determining deficiency of stamp duty to the tune of Rs.29,877.50 p. It is contended that the petitioner had purchased a building having an area 1777 square metres vide sale deed dated 31.12.1987 and the stamp was paid as per market value determined under Rule 340 of the Stamp Rules. The market value was determined to the tune of Rs.4,48,5007- whereupon the stamp duty was paid. However, the document was referred under Section 47-A of the Registration Act to the Collector for assessment of correct market value. The Sub Registrar after registration observed that the petitioner has not paid the stamp on the correct market value. It appears that a show-cause notice was issued to petitioner on 26.10.1998 pursuant to some complaint made by Shri A.K. Sharma. The Sub Divisional Officer referred to the report of tehsildar dated 11.9.1987 wherein he had assessed market value of the property to the tune of Rs.8,92,000/-. The Sub-Divisional Officer submitted his report to the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Bijnor whereupon proceeding was initiated under Section 47-A/33/40 (b) of the Stamp Act and after issuance of notice on 21.11.1988, which was contested by the petitioner vide objection dated 8.5.1989, the Sub Divisional Officer passed the order dated 22.7.1994 determining deficiency of stamp duty to the tune of Rs.29,877/ 50 p. This order was upheld by the revisional authority vide the order dated 3.7.1996.
(3.) IT is evident from the record that respondents in order to determine the market value of the property, relied upon the only factor that the building is situated at the main road near the Railway Station, Roadways, Head Post Office, Hospital and Intermediate College and, therefore, its market value cannot be assessed less than Rs.8 Lacs but regarding this finding, assessing authority has not considered and referred to any factor on the basis of which the said value has been assessed. On the contrary, the petitioner has stated that building was rented to five tenants for which eviction proceedings were initiated on the ground that the building is in dilapidated condition and the orders were passed by the competent authority accepting this contention, but the eviction of the tenant had not taken place. Moreover, once the market value of the property was determined and calculated taking into consideration the rate prescribed under Rule 340 of the Stamp Rules merely on the basis of the location the appellate authority have erred in law by saying that the property cannot be less than Rs.8 Lacs. In fact, no other aspect has been considered by the Collector, as is evident from page 67 of the writ petition.;