- (1.) V. K. Mittal, C. C. R. A. This revision has been preferred against the order dated 30-9-94 passed by the Additional Collector (F & R)/hamirpur, under Section 33 of Indian Stamp Act.
(2.) HEARD the learned Counsel for the parties and perused the relevant papers on file. The main point for consideration is whether the mining lease was given for 3 years and the lease deed has been signed for 1 year and, whether the stamp duty has been paid for the total amount of 3 years for which patta has been executed? With regard to letter dated 4-7-92 issued on behalf of Collector, Hamirpur to sub-registrar, Mahoba, is important. In this communication the office of the Collector has informed to sub-registrar that the lease deed, Papar No. 17-A, for the period 3-7-92 to 2-7-93, is being forwarded herewith for registration. Obviously the stamp duty would be charged for which the lease deed is being registered which is for one year. Therefore, the finding given by the Additional Collector in his order dated 30-9-94 that the stamp duty should be charged no the lease money for the entire 3 years is not tenable. In the circumstances, I find that the order dated 30-9-94 passed by the Additional Collector, Hamirpur, is not in accordance with law which is liable to be set aside. Therefore, the revision is allowed and the impugned order dated 30-9-94 passed by the Additional Collector, Hamirpur, is hereby quashed. Revision allowed. .;