- (1.) THIS is plaintiffs' second appeal challenging the judgement and decrees of the Courts below whereby their suit as well as appeal for declaration and permanent injunction have been dismissed.
(2.) AS per the averments, the plaintiff -appellants purchased a house vide sale deed No.1526 dated 16.1.1997 for a consideration of Rs. 1,50,000/ -. They paid stamp duty of Rs.23,250/ - at the rate of Rs.700/ - per square yard fixed by the Collector. The Sub Registrar, Narwana registered the sale deed and issued registration certificate to the parties. Thereafter, on 10.11.1997, the Sub Registrar, Narwana sent a sale deed to the Collector, Narwana under section 47 -A for determining the value of the house for the purpose of payment of fee as per the Stamp Act. Thereafter, the order was passed by the Collector which was null and void and liable to be set aside. Since the defendants were threatening to recover Rs.1,62,750/ -, as a land revenue, for which they have got no right, necessity arose to file the instant suit.
(3.) UPON notice, the defendant -respondents contested the suit maintaining that sale deed dated 16.1.1997 was executed for consideration of Rs.1,50,000/ - whereas the market value of the house in question was Rs.6000/ - per square yard and the plaintiffs should have affixed stamp duty at the prevalent market value of the said house. It was denied that the defendants violated any provisions of the Stamp Act. It was the specific case of the defendants that they issued notice to the plaintiffs and in response to the aforesaid notice, they appeared but thereafter, they did not come present and thus, order in question was passed legally. Since the plaintiff -appellants failed to pay the stamp duty, as determined, the respondents were entitled to recover the same as land revenue. Thus, dismissal of the suit was prayed. On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the following issues were framed: "i) Whether the order dated 16.12.1997 and notice dated 27.1.2004 are illegal, null and void as alleged? OPP ii) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to the decree for permanent injunction as prayed for? OPP. iii) Whether the Civil Court has got no jurisdiction to entertain the suit? OPD iv) Whether the suit of the plaintiffs is barred by limitation? OPD. v) Whether the suit of the plaintiffs is bad for want of notice under Section 80 CPC? OPD vi) Whether the plaintiffs have got no locus standi to file a suit against the defendants? OPD. vii) Relief.";