S. Vimala, J.@mdashThe appellant (purchaser) purchased land measuring 25 cents by sale deed, dated 18.06.2001, valuing the property at the rate of Rs. 500/- percent and presented the same for registration before the jurisdictional Sub-Registrar. On a reference being made by the Registering Authority, dated 03.09.2002, the Special Collector (Stamps) valued the property per square feet at Rs. 75/-. Challenging the same, the purchaser filed an appeal before the Inspector General of Registration (Chief Controlling Revenue Authority). The appellate authority fixed the value of the property at the rate of Rs. 80/- per sq.ft., This order is under challenge in this appeal. The first contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that when the sale deed has been registered on 18.06.2001, the reference ought to have been made within a period of three weeks from the date of registration of sale deed and that the reference made on 03.09.2002, i.e., 15 months after the date of registration is barred by limitation.
1.1. The next contention is that authorities authorized under the Stamp Act cannot take the date of consideration of the sale deed as the deadline for fixing the value of the property and that the date of registration alone is the crucial date for fixing the value of the property.
2. A perusal of the order passed by the Deputy Collector (Stamps) goes to show that value has been fixed at the time of consideration of the reference made by the Registering Authority. The order has been passed on 23.06.2005 and the order also reads that the value of the property during 2005 was sq.ft., Rs. 75/-. It is the grievance of the learned counsel for the appellant that when the grievance has been expressed that the Special Deputy Collector did not value the property properly the grievance was not answered, but the appellate authority has chosen to increase the valuation by fixing the value at Rs. 80/- per sq.ft.,
3. In order to appreciate the contention, it is necessary to look into the order passed by the Inspector General of Registration.
3.1. At the time of registration of the document the guideline value has been fixed at Rs. 43/- per sq.ft., But in this case, the character of the property itself is under challenge. It is claimed by the appellant that it is an agricultural land, but it is the contention of the Registering Authority that the property is a house site. It is mentioned in the order that the property in question is located two feet below the road. The report of Deputy Collector (Stamps) is also referred to in the order. As per the report, the property is located in an under developed area and it is in a low lying place. There is an observation that there are houses and house sites around the disputed property and no material has been placed to show that the property in dispute is used as the agricultural land.
4. Needless to point out that the Deputy Collector (Stamps), being a Revenue Authority, would be in possession of revenue records. A mere perusal of the records like chitta, adangal and other documents would clearly show that whether the property is used as agricultural land or house site. Just because there are house sites and houses around the property, it cannot mean that the disputed property itself should be a house site. Therefore, the order passed by the Inspector General of Registration is set-aside. The order passed by the Deputy Collector (Stamps), dated 23.06.2005, fixing the value of the property, based upon the market value during the year 2005, also is hereby set-aside. The matter is remitted back to the Deputy Collector (Stamps), who will fix the market value as on date of registration of the document, i.e., as on 18.06.2001. The appellant is at liberty to adduce necessary evidence before the Deputy Collector (Stamps) to show the market value of the property as on 18.06.2001. The appellant is also at liberty to raise the issue regarding the plea of limitation and the Deputy Collector (Stamps) shall also decide the same. With the above directions, this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is allowed and the matter is remitted back to the Deputy Collector (Stamps), who will decide the issues raised by the appellant and to pass appropriate orders on merits. No costs. Consequently, the connected MP is closed.
