Roop Chandra vs State of Uttarakhand

Servesh Kumar Gupta, J.—Having heard urgency application no. 389 of 2013, it is allowed for the reasons stated therein. Admit the petition.

Having heard the learned Counsel of the petitioner, it appears that the petitioner produced a sale deed for registration on 20.03.2010 that pertains to 1.416 hectares land, which he purchased for the consideration of Rs. 17.98 Lakhs something. The deed was impounded by the Sub Registrar and he sent a letter to the Collector on 20.03.2010 itself narrating the deficiency of the stamp duty leviable from the purchaser of the land. The Collector sent the matter to the Addl. District Collector where the objections were filed by Sri Roop Chandra. The Addl. District Collector called the report from the Tehsildar, who in detail sent his report dated 09.07.2010, rectifying the rate of the stamp duty per hectare. The Tehsildar reported that at the spot where the land was being purchased the Government rate of land was Rs. 12,69,850/- per hectare. The contention of the learned Counsel is that he calculated the stamp duty on the rate fixed by the Government for the purchase of the land at the spot but even then the Addl. District Magistrate found the deficiency of the stamp duty to the tune of Rs. 2,25,330/- and Rs. 54,080/- as an interest upon the same, in total he calculated Rs. 2,79,410/- to be recovered from the petitioner.

It is pertinent to mention here that the sale deed is still lying in the Registrar Office and has not been registered so far. The learned Counsel has argued that either they have sent recovery warrant or going to recover the said amount from the petitioner.

The Court feels that the said amount could not be recovered from the petitioner and more so when the sale deed has not been registered till now.

In these circumstances, let the counter affidavit be filed by the State within six weeks.

List thereafter. Meanwhile, the operation of the order passed by the Addl. District Collector dated 18.04.2011, which was confirmed by the revisional court on 04.07.2012, shall remain stayed. The document concerned also will be lying in the Registrar Office as such without any registration till the final decision is taken by this Court in this petition. The recovery proceedings, if any, shall also be remain stayed. (Stay application no. 542 of 2013 stands disposed of).