- (1.) HEARD Sri Asit Srivastava, learned Counsel for the petitioners and Sri H.P. Srivastava, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the oppo­site parties.
(2.) THE petitioners being aggrieved by the order dated 2.8.1991 passed by the Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue), Lucknow has filed the instant writ petition. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioners through registered sale deed dated 31.12.1984 purchased half share in the property known as 7, Dali B'agh, Old Butler Road, Lucknow from Dr. Mulk Raj, son of late Rai Bahadur Laxman Das and Smt. Asha Agarwal, daughter of Dr. Mulk Raj for a consideration of Rs. 2,52,200/-. The Additional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) on the basis of an audit report made during audit inspection in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Lucknow, initiated proceedings against the petitioners under Sections 33 and 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act') by issuing a notice dated 26.3.1991. The impugned order dated 2.8.1991 reveals that a notice dated 26.3.1991 was issued to the petitioners and as no one ap­peared on behalf of the petitioners, the value of the property was assessed as Rs.7,84,000/ and additional stamp duty of Rs.55,860/- and a penalty of Rs. 55.860/ was levied.
(3.) THE learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that for the first time through notice dated 20.12.1991, the petitioners acquired the knowledge about the order dated 2.8.1991. He further submits that the proceedings initiated by the Addi­tional District Magistrate (Finance and Revenue) on 26.3.1991 was time barred in view of the specific provisions contained in Section 47-A (4) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. He further submits that sufficient stamp duty was paid by the petition­ers when the instrument was duly registered on 31.12.1984 by the registering authority and the impugned order dated 2.8.1991 deserves to be quashed.;