Anjani Kumar - (1.) -By means of this writ petition, petitioner Gaya Prasad Pandey challenged the order dated 17.9.1998, passed by the District Registrar/A.D.M. (Finance and Revenue), Sant Ravidas Nagar directing the petitioner to pay stamp duty on the current circle rate so that the document may be registered. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the petitioner preferred stamp Revision before the Board of Revenue. The Board of Revenue vide order dated 14.10.1998, has held that the revision is not maintainable and, therefore, it is dismissed. Board of Revenue has given a finding that as the District Registrar has passed the order under Section 67 of the Registration Act, therefore, the said order is not revisable under Section 56 of the Stamp Duty Act. Against the said two orders, the petitioner preferred this writ petition.
(2.) THE petitioner referred a notice from the District Registrar, Sant Ravidas Nagar, that he has presented a document which is sale deed regarding his plots situated in the village Ibrahimpur for registration in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Calcutta, West Bengal, who after registering under Section 30 (2) forwarded the same to the District Registrar, Sant Ravidas Nagar, for taking necessary action under Section 67 of the Registration Act. THE petitioner set up a case before the District Registrar that he has never executed such document which is alleged to be a sale deed, nor he ever produced any such sale deed for registration before the District Registrar with regard to his plots situated in village Ibrahimpur. He has stated that neither the alleged document is sale deed nor any stamp duty is payable on the same. Section 30 of the Registration Act has been amended by U. P. Act No. 27 of 1994, whereby it is mandatory that the property shall be registered only in the district where it is situated. This amendment has come into force with effect from 16.9.1994. In this view of the matter, the document presented before the Sub-Registrar, Calcutta, West Bengal, could not have been registered as the property covered by the sale deed referred to above is situated in District Sant Ravidas Nagar. Without entering into the controversy as to whether the petitioner has executed or has not executed the sale deed, the present writ petition can be disposed of only on the ground that since the petitioner set up a case that he has not executed any sale deed as alleged in the month of January, 1995, has never produced for registration before Sub-Registrar, Calcutta, West Bengal, the authority could not ask him to pay stamp duty and the document could be refused to be registered or registration thereof can be cancelled after following the procedure prescribed under the law. The contesting respondents, if at all, feel aggrieved of non-registration of the document, their remedy lies to file a suit where the question of fact can be adjudicated upon on the basis of the evidence adduced by the respective parties. In this view of the matter, the order challenged in the present writ petition suffers from manifest error of law and deserves to be set aside and is hereby set aside. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 14.10.1998 is quashed.;