# State of U.P. & Ors v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2023) 2 ILRA 213
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-01-18
- **Case number:** Writ C No. 1003352 of 2006
- **Bench:** Manish Mathur
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/state-of-u-p-ors-v-chief-controlling-revenue-authority-u-p-anr-49642
- **Pages:** 6

## Headnote

(A) Civil Law - The Indian Stamp Act, 1899
- Section 47 A - Assessment - Section 47A
(3) - reference - Section 56 - Appeal , The
Uttar Pradesh (Valuation of Property)
214 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Rules, 1997 - Rule 5(a) - assessment, Rule
5(b) - mode of calculation of stamp duty -
While Determining stamp duty pertaining
to trees situate in a grove etc. - exemplers
are to be adverted to by authority
concerned while considering matter under
Section 47A of the Act of 1899 - valuation
is required to be taken with regard to
exempler for similar trees in the locality
on the date of instrument - a circle rate
applied with effect from a particular date
cannot be taken to be an exempler for all
times to come - would be contrary to the
provisions of Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997.(Para -11,13)

Property in question - nature of a grove - no
dispute with regard to stamp duty payable on
the immovable portion - circle rate notified -
accordance with Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997 - Controversy - valuation of trees over
immovable property - subject matter of
instrument of transfer - whether required to
be taken as per circle rate or as per the Rules
of 1997 - valuation as per circle rate -
whether in consonance with the Rules?
(Para - 8,9)

HELD:- Although the assessment by either
of the authorities is not in consonance with
Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997 but since the
appellate order appears to be in consonance
with Government Order dated 07.07.2000,
this Court does not see any reason to
interfere
with
the
order
under
challenge.(Para - 17)

Petition dismissed. (E-7)

## Text

2 All. State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P. & Anr.
213
the sale deed for the area which had been
purchased by him, cannot now be subjected
to additional stamp duty for any such area
which has neither been purchased by him
nor any deed having been executed for such
area in his favour. As such the orders
passed by the authorities below imposing
additional stamp duty, penalty and interest
on the petitioner for allegedly making
illegal constructions beyond the area of
land purchased by him, deserves to be
quashed."

Madras Refineries Ltd.(supra)

" 5. In Limmer Asphalte Paving
Co. v. IRC [(1872) LR 7 Exch. 211] it was
stated:

"In order to determine whether
any, and if any, what stamp duty is
chargeable upon an instrument the legal
rule is that the real and true meaning of the
instrument is to be ascertained; that the
description of it given in the instrument
itself by the parties is immaterial, even
although they may have believed that its
effect and operation was to create a
security mentioned in the Stamp Act, and
they so declared."

xxx

xxx

xx

11. ........It is the real and true
meaning of the Deed of Trust and Mortgage
and the Guarantee Agreement which has to
be ascertained, and this leaves no room for
doubt that the view taken by the High Court
in this respect is correct and does not call
for interference. Mr Ram Reddy relied on
some decisions to support his argument
that the guarantee Agreement was the
security for the loan and was the principal
or the primary document, but these cases
were decided on different facts and have no
real bearing on the controversy before us."

8. In view of the fact that impugned
orders dated 23rd August, 2002 passed by
opposite party No.2 as well as appellate
order dated 12th June, 2003 passed by
opposite party No.1 are not in consonance
with judgments pronounced by this Court
as well as the Supreme Court, are being
erroneous
are
therefore
set
aside.
Consequently the writ petition succeeds
and is allowed. Parties to bear their own
costs.

9. Learned counsel for petitioner
submits that in pursuance to impugned
orders, the petitioner has already deposited
certain amount with the authorities. Liberty
is granted to petitioner to claim refund of
the aforesaid amount which shall be
refunded within a period of three months
from the date an application along with a
copy of this order is submitted before the
concerned authority along with interest @
6% per annum from date of deposit till date
of actual payment.
----------
(2023) 2 ILRA 213
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: LUCKNOW 18.01.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MANISH MATHUR, J.

Writ C No. 1003352 of 2006

State of U.P. & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P. &
Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioners:
C.S.C.

Counsel for the Respondents:
Anoop Kumar, Ramji Das

(A) Civil Law - The Indian Stamp Act, 1899
- Section 47 A - Assessment - Section 47A
(3) - reference - Section 56 - Appeal , The
Uttar Pradesh (Valuation of Property)
214 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Rules, 1997 - Rule 5(a) - assessment, Rule
5(b) - mode of calculation of stamp duty -
While Determining stamp duty pertaining
to trees situate in a grove etc. - exemplers
are to be adverted to by authority
concerned while considering matter under
Section 47A of the Act of 1899 - valuation
is required to be taken with regard to
exempler for similar trees in the locality
on the date of instrument - a circle rate
applied with effect from a particular date
cannot be taken to be an exempler for all
times to come - would be contrary to the
provisions of Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997.(Para -11,13)

Property in question - nature of a grove - no
dispute with regard to stamp duty payable on
the immovable portion - circle rate notified -
accordance with Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997 - Controversy - valuation of trees over
immovable property - subject matter of
instrument of transfer - whether required to
be taken as per circle rate or as per the Rules
of 1997 - valuation as per circle rate -
whether in consonance with the Rules?
(Para - 8,9)

HELD:- Although the assessment by either
of the authorities is not in consonance with
Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997 but since the
appellate order appears to be in consonance
with Government Order dated 07.07.2000,
this Court does not see any reason to
interfere
with
the
order
under
challenge.(Para - 17)

Petition dismissed. (E-7)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Manish Mathur, J.)

(01.) Heard Mr. Devendar Mohan
Shukla, learned counsel State counsel
appearing on behalf of petitioners and Mr.
Ramji Das and Mr. Anoop Kumar, learned
counsel appearing for opposite party no.2.

(02.) In view of order being proposed
to be passed, notices to opposite party no.1
stand dispensed with.

(03.) Petition has been filed assailing
order dated 28.02.2005 passed under
Section 56 of Indian Stamp Act, 1899
whereby appeal preferred by opposite party
no.2 against assessment under section 47 A
of the Act was allowed.

(04.) Learned counsel for petitioner
submits that with regard to property in
question, an instrument of sale dated
20.12.2003 was presented for registration
in which apart from the immoveable
property, various trees were also indicated
and the property itself was in the nature of
a grove. It is further submitted that
although there was no dispute with regard
to stamp duty paid on the immoveable
property but deficient stamp duty was
indicated with regard to trees situate on the
property and therefore reference was made
under Section 47A (3) of the Act and by
means
of
order
dated
03.01.2005,
assessment of deficient stamp duty on such
tree was indicated and penalty imposed
alongwith interest. Appeal filed by the
opposite party no.2 under section 56 was
thereafter allowed by means of impugned
order only on the basis of self assessment
of opposite party no.2.

(05.) Learned counsel submits that the
order passed under Section 47A was in fact
the correct assessment and was based on
the circle rate issued on 04.08.2003 by the
Collector whereas the impugned order
places reliance on the subsequent circle rate
issued on 16.06.2004, which was after the
execution of instrument of transfer and as
such it is submitted could not have found
the basis of the appellate order since it was
not retrospective in effect. It is further
submitted that even otherwise, appeal has
been allowed only on the basis of selfassessment of the opposite party no.2 @ of
Rs.1.50 per tree which was incorrect since
2 All. State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P. & Anr.
215
the circle rate dated 04.08.2003 was clearly
applicable upon the instrument as per
which the trees were required to be
assessed @ Rs.1000/- per unit for trees
upto the age of 10 years whereafter
assessment was required to be made @
Rs.2000/- for trees upto the age of 20 years
or more.

(06.) As such, it is submitted that
impugned order is bad on two counts that
firstly, it places reliance on circle rate
which was issued subsequent to execution
of instrument of transfer and secondly that
it is based only on self-assessment of
opposite party no.2.

(07.) Learned counsel appearing on
behalf of answering opposite party while
refuting submissions advanced by learned
counsel for petitioner submits that there is
no dispute with regard to stamp duty
payable on the immovable property and
reference has been made only with regard
to trees situate on the aforesaid immovable
property which is subject matter of
instrument of transfer and calculation of
minimum value of land, grove, garden and
trees situated thereon is required to be
made in terms of Rule 5(b) of the Uttar
Pradesh (Valuation of Property) Rules,
1997 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules of
1997) which prescribed the mode of
assessment to revenue as the assessment as
per Rule 5(a) of the Rules of 1997 plus the
value of the trees standing thereon worked
out on the basis of average price of the
trees of similar nature prevailing in the
locality on the date of execution of the
instrument. As such, it is submitted that
exempler was required to be taken into
account by authorities for assessing stamp
duty on the valuation of trees. Learned
counsel has also drawn attention to
Government
Order
dated
07.07.2000
brought on record as Annexure CA-1 to
counter affidavit to submit that the State
Government itself has issued directions that
reference should not be made with regard
to dispute only pertaining to trees over
immovable property and that appropriate
market value of such trees is required to be
self-assessed by the assessee. It is also
submitted that the impugned order has not
placed reliance on the circle rate issued on
16.06.2004 and it is in fact based on the
self-assessment of the answering opposite
party, which is in consonance with
Government Order dated 07.07.2000 and as
such no exception thereto can be taken.

(08.)

Upon
consideration
of
submissions
advanced
by
learned
counsel for the parties, it is apparent that
the
short
controversy
involved
is
whether
valuation
of
trees
over
immovable property which is subject
matter of instrument of transfer is
required to be taken as per circle rate or
as per the Rules of 1997 and whether the
valuation as per circle rate can be said to
be in consonance with the Rules?

(09.) Learned counsel for parties
admit that the property in question was in
the nature of a grove and there was no
dispute with regard to stamp duty payable
on the immovable portion of the property
and reference was in fact made under
Section 47A of the Act of 1899 only with
regard to dispute of stamp duty pertaining
to trees situate thereon. It is also submitted
that the mode of calculation of stamp duty
is clearly prescribed in Rule 5(b) of the
Rules of 1997. However, while learned
State Counsel submits that the circle rate as
notified on 04.08.2003 is in consonance
with Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997,
learned counsel for opposite party no.2
disputes the same.
216 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

(10.) For proper appreciation of the
controversy, it is necessary to evaluate the
Rules of 1997, Rule 5(a) & (b) of the Rules
which are as follows:-

"5. Calculation of minimum
value of land, grove, garden and
building:-

For the purposes of payment of
stamp duty, the minimum value of
immovable property forming the subject of
an instrument shall be deemed to be such as
may be arrived at as follows :-

(a) In case of land
Minimum value

Where
agricultural
or
non-agricultural
Area of land multiplied by
minimum value fixed by
Collector of the district
under Rule 4.
(b) In case of grove or
garden-

(i) if assessed to revenue
Minimum value of the
land as worked out in the
manner
laid
down
in
Clause (a) plus the value
of
the
trees
standing
thereon worked out on the
basis of the average price
of the trees of the same
nature,
size
and
age
prevailing" in the locality
on
the
date
of
the
instrument;

(ii) if not assessed to
revenue or is exempted
from it and is rented.
Twenty times the annual
rent plus the premium, if
any, plus the value of trees
standing
thereon
determined in accordance
with sub-clause (i);

(iii) if not assessed to
revenue or is exempted
from it, and profit has
arisen during three years
immediately proceeding
the
date
of
the
instrument.
Twenty times the average
annual profit plus the
value of the trees standing
thereon
determined
in
accordance
with
subclause (i);

(iv) if not assessed to
revenue
or
exempted
from it and no profit has
arisen during the three
years
immediately
proceeding the date of
the instrument.
Twenty times the assumed
annual profit plus the
value of the trees standing
thereon
determined
in
accordance
with
subclause (i).

(11.) From a perusal of aforesaid Rule
5(b) of the Rules of 1997, it is apparent that
while determining stamp duty with regard
to trees situate over immovable property,
the value of trees is required to be worked
out on the basis of exempler regarding
average price of trees of the same nature,
size and age prevailing in the locality on
the date of the instrument. Therefore, it is
evident that while determining stamp duty
pertaining to trees situate in a grove etc.,
exemplers are to be adverted to by
authority concerned while considering
matter under Section 47A of the Act of
1899.

(12.) So far as the question whether
circle rate as notified by the Collector of
the District can be said to be in consonance
with Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997 is
concerned, it is evident from Circular dated
04.08.2003 that it only indicates the date
with effect from it would be effected which
is 04.08.2003 and there is no indication
with regard to time period for which it
would
remain
applicable.
Although,
subsequently another circle rate was issued
on 16.06.2004 to be effective from
16.06.2004 itself but there again the time
period of its operation is not indicated
anywhere in the notification.

(13.)

Upon
consideration
of
provisions of Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997, it is evident that valuation is required
to be taken with regard to exempler for
similar trees in the locality on the date of
instrument. A circle rate applied with effect
from a particular date without any time
period of its operation cannot be said to be
in consonance with the provisions of Rule
5(b) of the Rules of 1997 since it could
operate for a few months, years or even
interminably and therefore it cannot be
taken to be an exempler for all times to
2 All. State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority U.P. & Anr.
217
come and in the considered opinion of this
Court would be contrary to the provisions
of Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997.

(14.) Learned State Counsel has
adverted to Rule 4(2) of the Rules of 1997
to submit that such circle rates are required
to be issued every two years and, therefore,
the said circle rates would be applicable
only for a period of two years and not
beyond.
It
has
been
informed
that
subsequently by means of an amendment,
the operation of circle rates has been made
applicable only for a period of one year.
Nonetheless,
the
practical
aspect
of
aforesaid circle rates also can be discounted
in terms of specific statutory provisions
under Rule 5(b) of the Rules of 1997 which
specifically provide for exemplers in the
same locality as on the date of execution of
instrument. The practical aspect which is
required to be considered is that prices of
trees situated on an immovable property
may differ from time to time and price as in
one year may not be the same in another
year or even in other months of the same
year. As such, Rule 5(b) of the Rules of
1997 clearly indicate that exempler is to be
taken with regard to date of execution of a
document.
The
primary
purpose
of
insertion of such a condition in the Rules
would take into account the changes in
prices of similar trees in the same locality
from time to time. As such, a single circle
rates for all the localities in a particular
district for a specified time period cannot
be taken to be an exempler and would, in
the considered opinion of this Court, be
contrary to the provisions of Rule 5(b) of
the Rules of 1997.

(15.) In the present case, it is evident
that the order passed under Section 47A of
the Act of 1899 is clearly based on the
circle rates notified on 04.08.2003. No
exempler whatsoever has been indicated in
the aforesaid order in terms of Rule 5(b) of
the Rules of 1997. The appellate authority
as well while noticing the subsequent
notification of circle rates on 16.06.2004
has thereafter indicated calculation of
stamp duty as per self-assessment of
opposite party no.2. Such an assessment
appears
to
be
in
consonance
with
Government Order dated 07.07.2000. It is
clear that in neither of the two orders has
any adherence been made to Rule 5(b) of
the Rules of 1997. However, in view of fact
that seventeen years have passed, this Court
does not see any occasion to remand the
matter for consideration afresh since after
passing of so many years, exemplers may
not be available for fresh adjudication of
the matter particularly when the impugned
order appears to be passed in terms of
Government Order dated 07.07.2000 which
predates the instrument of transfer and
appears to be applicable as on the date of
execution of instrument of transfer.

(16.) The aforesaid Government
Order dated 07.07.2000 has been brought
on record alongwith the counter affidavit
and clearly provides that stamp duty is
being levied at different rates in different
District therefore to obviate this problem, it
had been decided that the valuation
indicated by the assessee regarding such
fees as per self-assessment should be taken
as the actual valuation and such matter
should not be referred to the Collector
indicating any deficiency in stamp duty
particularly since there is no great effect on
revenue generated by such deficiency.

(17.) In view of the fact that although
the assessment by either of the authorities
is not in consonance with Rule 5(b) of the
Rules of 1997 but since the appellate order
appears
to
be
in
consonance
with
218 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Government Order dated 07.07.2000, this
Court does not see any reason to interfere
with the order under challenge.

(18.) The writ petition as such being
devoid of merit is dismissed. The parties to
bear their own costs.
----------
(2023) 2 ILRA 218
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 30.11.2022

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE PRITINKER DIWAKER, J.
THE HON'BLE NALIN KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, J.

Capital Case No. 2 of 2020
With
Reference No. 02 of 2020

Murari Lal & Anr. ...Appellants (In Jail)
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Appellants:
Sri V.P. Srivastava (Sr. Advocate), Sri
Rajeev Nayan Singh, Sri Lav Srivastava, Sri
Vijendra Pal

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
Sri J.K. Upadhyay, A.G.A.

A. Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860 - Section 302 - Murder - Sentence
of Death - Evidence Act,1872 - Section
24
-
Extra
judicial
confession
-
Reliability - Extra judicial confession is a
weak piece of evidence as it can be
easily
procured
whenever
direct
evidence
is
not
available
-
An
extrajudicial confession, if voluntary,
true & inspire confidence and made in a
fit state of mind, can be relied upon by
the court - conviction can be based on a
voluntarily confession but the rule of
prudence
requires
that
wherever
possible it should be corroborated by
independent material evidence (Para 25)
Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,1860 -
Section 302 - Murder - Extra judicial
confession - extra judicial confession was
made by the accused before the P.W. 6,
who used to work as a ear cleaner - that
witness held to be unreliable because the
accused appellants were not known to
him - they would not have made such
extra judicial confession before a person
who was alien to them - extra judicial
confession
made
by
the
accused
appellants before doctor wholly unreliable
because the same have been recorded in
similar language and at the relevant time
the accused appellants were in police
custody - how and in what circumstance
extra
judicial
confession
has
been
recorded, the prosecution utterly failed to
do so - Recovery - on the basis of
confessional statement made by accused,
one 'Salwar' allegedly belonging to the
deceased was seized from the sugarcane
field - the prosecution failed to prove the
recovery in accordance with law - neither
the memorandum of the accused was
recorded nor the recovery was supported
by any independent witness - recovery
made from an open space, which is
accessible to everyone - prosecution failed
to prove the charges beyond reasonable
doubt - reference for affirmation of the
death sentence, rejected (Para 24)

Allowed. (E-5)

List of Cases cited:

Ramanand @ Nandlal Bharti Vs St. of U.P.
Criminal Appeal Nos. 64-65 of 2022 13.10.2022

(Delivered by Hon'ble Pritinker Diwaker, J.)

1. Sri V.P. Srivastava, learned Senior
Advocate assisted by Sri Rajeev Nayan
Singh, appearing for the appellants and Sri
J.K. Upadhyay, learned AGA for the State.

2. This death reference was made to
this Court under Section 366 of the
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in short
'Cr.P.C.')
for
confirmation
of
death