- (1.) This order shall dispose of the above two petitions i.e C.W.P No. 10575 of 2010 and C.W.P No. 10699 of 2010 as common question of facts are involved in these petitions . However, for the facility of reference, the facts are being taken from C.W.P No. 10575 of 2010. Petitioner-Amrit Pal Singh approached this Court by way of instant writ petition under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari setting aside the order dated 31.12.2008 (P-3) passed by respondent No. 3 and order dated 26.08.2009 (P-5).
(2.) In CWP No. 10575 of 2010, a complaint was made by Jabbar Jang Singh-respondent No. 5 that Amritpal Singh resident of 495-C, Urban Estate, Phase-I, Bathinda had got registered a sale deed No. 4853 on 06.09.2006 for Rs.20 lacs whereas market value is 6/7 times higher and thus, he has cheated the Government to 12-14 lakhs. The complaint was accompanied the photocopy of valuation report. Notice under the Punjab Stamp (Dealing of under Valued Instrument) Rules, 1983 under Rule 4 was issued by the Collector, Bathinda that the complainant had given his Power of Attorney. In reply to the notice, the vendee has stated that the complainant has himself received the full payment after having given the GPA to the father of the vendee and they have purchased the kothi from the complainant for Rs.20 lacs. The relations with the complainant got strained and after a gap of seven months of the sale deed, he has made the complaint. Reference was made to sale deed No. 4780 dated 4.9.2006 in which the cost of sale price of this land was Rs.20 lacs. The petitioner also placed on record the assessed value of the property from Engineer Parminder Singh on 18.09.2007, who had assessed the value at Rs.1,30,77,000/-. The petitioner had taken the loan from State Bank of Patiala Branch Bucho Mandi. After going through the evidence led by the vendee and the complainant, the Court below came to a conclusion that the vendee could not take the benefit of the sale dated 06.09.2006 as it was a case of vacant plot and the sale was registered @ Rs.3200/- per sq yard. The sale deed No. 4853 was of 2 storey corner house. The next argument of the petitioner before the Court below that the value was got assessed after one year of the sale deed i.e on 18.09.2007 and during this period the real estate price in Bathinda has increased manifold, was rejected on 31.12.2008 (P-3) on the ground that they have registered it in just Rs.20 lacs and after one year it was got assessed to Rs.1.30 crore. The vendee has not stated that they had spent any money on the building after purchase. Apart from this fact, it was a corner plot. As per report of Engineer Parminder Singh, the market value was assessed at Rs.1,30,77,000/- and sale value has been assessed as Rs.94.48 lacs. The Collector imposed Rs.4,57,740/- as deficiency of stamp duty with regard to sale deed No. 4853 dated 06.09.2006. It was further ordered that interest @12% per annum on the amount of deficiency of sale deed be recovered from the date of registration of the sale deed till its payment. In CWP No. 10699 of 2010, a complaint was made by Jabbar Jang Singh-respondent No. 5 that he was owner in possession of the land comprising khasra No. 1025/8/1 (0-12) Nehri, 1025/8/2 (2-6) Nehri.
(3.) He sold the said land to the petitioner-Amritpal Singh at the market rate. A sale deed No. 1076 on 08.05.2007 was registered for Rs.1,81,500/-. The complaint was accompanied the photocopy of valuation report. Notice under the Punjab Stamp (Dealing of under Valued Instrument) Rules, 1983 under Rule 4 was issued by the Collector, Bathinda. In reply to the notice, the purchase party told that vide Vasika No.1076 dated 8.5.2007, he has purchased land measuring 02 kanal 18 marlas which is situated in village Jassi Pau Wali. Previously, respondent No. 5 purchased the land vasika No. 6374 and 6375 dated 15.02.1999. But now the petitioner purchased the land from respondent No. 5 for Rs.181500/-.;