- (1.) THE Order passed by the First Appellate Authority under the Indian Stamp Act dated 24.4.2006 as well as order passed by the Chief Revenue Officer, U. P. Allahabad in appeal under Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act dated 7.06.2013, are challenged by means of the present writ petition.
(2.) IT is not in dispute that the document, which was subject -matter in the aforesaid proceedings has been executed in the year 12.01.2001 and the proceedings in accordance with the provisions of Stamp Act had been initiated against the petitioner in the year 2001 itself. In view of the said facts, the provisions of the U.P. Stamp (Valuation of Property) Rules 1997 as applicable on the date of initiation of the proceedings are to be taken into consideration. According to the petitioner, the order impugned are bad on three grounds : (a) an application was made by the petitioner for leading oral evidence, which has not been considered in its true perspective and, therefore, the orders are bad; (b) that the Respondent Authorities have illegally included the gallery, which had been constructed inside the building within the covered area; and, (c) Rule 5 as applicable in the year 2001 was arbitrary. The valuation of the land should not have been taken into consideration. According to the petitioner, it is for removing the said defect in Rule 5, that it was amended in the year 2006. Therefore, the valuation of property covered by the deed should have been calculated in accordance with the Rules of 2006.
(3.) HEARD Sri Mahesh Chandra Joshi and learned Standing Counsel.;