Civil Miscellaneous Appeal set aside an order confirming a valuation of agricultural land as a housing site, holding it violated limitation rules, statutory provisions on valuation criteria, and principles of natural justice due to lack of proper inspection.
Order dated 24.02.2011 set aside; Civil Miscellaneous Appeal allowed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.02.2018
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ
C.M.A.No.1860 of 2013 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2013
T.Sudha ... Appellant
Vs. 1. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority & Inspector General of Registration, No.100, Santhome High Road, Chennai – 600 028. 2. The Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), District Collectrate’s Office, Cuddalore – 1. 3. The Sub Registrar of Assurances, Panruti, Cuddalore District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 47-A (10) of the Indian Stamps Act, 1899, to set aside the order of the first respondent dated 24.02.2011 in proceedings D.Dis.No.13146/N3/2008 on the file of the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, against the orders of Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), Cuddalore No.Spl.R.No.466/07-08 dated 03.03.2008.
For Appellant : Mr.K.Moorthy
For Respondents : Mr.M.Venkadesh Kumar, Government Advocate (C.S)
J U D G M E N T
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the 1st respondent/Chief Controlling Revenue Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration, Chennai, 24.02.2011 in proceedings D.Dis.No.13146/N3/2008.
as under:-
(2) A copy of the order shall be communicated to the registering officer concerned for his record.
(3) The difference in the amount of duty determined by the Collector shall be paid within two months from the date of final order passed under sub-section (2) or sub section (3) of section 47-A.
(4) The Collector shall, after collecting the difference in amount of stamp duty and interest, if any, under section 47A, give a certificate in Form III by endorsement on the instrument."
agricultural land and it was also admitted by the 2nd respondent during the inspection that it is an agricultural property. But, contrary to the observation, respondents have fixed the market value considering its future use and future development. A judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), Chennai Collectorate, Singaravelar Maligai, Chennai, Vs. Thajunnisa and others reported in (2015) 6 MLJ 129, can be referred to, wherein, it has been held that the classification of the land, the nature of use on the date of registration shall be taken as criteria for fixing the market value. But, the authority shall not fix the value on the basis of future development. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is extracted hereunder:-
“10. It is to be borne in mind that the
Deputy Inspector General of Registration's Report dated 22.03.2002 does not indicate any conclusion which was arrived at to the effect that the Respondents/Petitioners lands in question were not agricultural lands. Just because the lands in question are having the potential of being converted as house sites in future, the authorities in this regard cannot allow their imagination to run riot or to indulge in assumptions, presumptions, surmises and conjectures etc., in the considered opinion of this Court. Even the Suo Moto power as envisaged under Sub Section (3) of the Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act ought to have been exercised within two years from the date of Registration of the documents. As a matter of fact, the Suo Moto power of revision should have been exercised well before 11.04.1999 not at a later point of time. As such, it is candidly clear that the impugned order dated 08.04.2002 is without jurisdiction whatsoever and resultantly, Form II notices issued were invalid and illegal in the eye of law.”
reads as under:-
11-A. Decision of the appellate authority. - The appellate authority may, for the purpose of deciding an appeal,-
(a) call for any, information or record from any public office, officer or authority under the Government or any local authority;
(b) examine and record statements from any member of the public officer of authority under the Government or the local authority; and
(c) inspect the property after due notice to the parties concerned.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS VII)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
asi
To
+1cc to Mr.K.Moorthy, Advocate, S.R.No.10650
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.10581
C.M.A.No.1860 of 2013
and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2013
SAI(CO)
CS/26/04/18
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the appellate authority violated procedural rules by passing the final order beyond the three-month limitation period specified?
Whether the market value of the agricultural land could legally be fixed based on its future use and development rather than its classification on the date of registration?
Whether the violation of natural justice occurred due to the non-conduct of site inspection by the appellate authority and delegation of power to an unauthorized officer?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Periasamy and other Vs. The Chief Controlling Revenue AuthorityRelied on¶25
2009 (6) CTC 632
6 provisions across 3 enactments
T.Sudha
The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority cum Inspector General of Registration
The Special Deputy Collector (Stamps)
The Sub Registrar of Assurances
M. Govindaraj
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
