HEMANT GUPTA,J. - (1.) THIS judgment shall dispose of Civil Writ Petition Nos. 3130, 3132 and 3134 of 2008 against the order passed by the Collector, Bathinda, on 18.08.2005 and order dated 29.09.2006 in appeal passed by the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot, arising out of proceedings initiated under section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (for short "the Act") against the respondent-company.
(2.) VIDE three separate sale deeds dated 19.04.205, the respondent company purchased land measuring 9 Kanals 7.1/2 Marlas; 63 Kanals 8.1/2 Marlas; and 1 Kanal 12 Marlas. A show cause notice was issued to the respondent private respondents herein for initiating proceedings under section 47-A of the Act on the ground that the instrument of sale is deficient in stamp duty. After the issuance of a show cause notice and an opportunity of hearing, the Collector found that the instrument is deficient in stamp duty as Rs. 5,00,000/- per acre is the Collector's rate. The said order has been affirmed in appeal. The vendee before the Collector asserted that the sale is of agricultural land and that market rate is not higher than Rs. 3 lac per acre and, thus, stamp duty paid is not deficient. The learned Collector found that Rs. 5 lac is the collector's rate per acre and that 3% excess stamp is payable on the property falling within 5 kilometers of the limits of the Corporation and, thus, the deficient amount of stamp duty was found to be recoverable from the respondent-company. However, in appeal, the learned Commissioner returned a finding that no evidence has been produced on behalf of the State to prove that the market value of the disputed land is Rs. 5 lacs or rebutted the evidence produced by the appellant. Still further, reliance was placed upon judgments of this Court in Chamkaur Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1991 Punjab and Haryana 26 and Injderjit Singh v. Punjab State, 1997(3) RCR(Civil) 351 : 1997(Suppl.) Civil Court Cases 607 and some other judgments following the aforesaid view. On the said basis, the order of Collector was quashed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that after the decision in Chamkaur Singh's case (supra) was rendered, the provisions of sub-section (1) of Section 47-A of the Act has been substituted by Act No. 14 of 2001. In terms of the amended sub-section, Rule 3-A has been inserted in the Punjab Stamp (Dealing of Undervalued Instruments) Rules 1983 (for short "the Rules") on 23.08.2002. In terms of the powers conferred under Rule 3-A of the Rules, collector's rate has been determined which is Rs. 5 lacs per acre. Reliance is placed upon the judgment rendered by us on 18.09.2008 in CWP No. 11530 of 2005 titled Sukhjit Singh Cheema, Advocate v. Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority, Chandigarh and others, 2009(1) RCR(Civil) 337 (P&H) wherein the decision in Chamkaur Singh's case (supra) was considered as well as amendment in the statute. After considering the various judgments, this Court has held that the collector's rate is relevant to determine the market value on the basis of which stamp duty is payable on the date of registration of the instrument.
(3.) FOR the reasons mentioned in the said judgment, order dated 29.09.2006 (Annexure P-11) passed by the Commissioner, Faridkot Division, Faridkot, is not sustainable. Consequently, the same is set aside and that of Collector passed on 18.08.2005 (Annexure P-10) is restored. Petition allowed.;