The ground taken by the appellant in the writ petition before the High Court was that unless the appellant deposited fifty percent of the total amount of Rs.15,70,000/ towards deficit stamp duty, registration charges and penalty, the revision petition of the appellant would number be entertained and the appellant was number in a position to deposit such a huge amount as a companydition for filing the revision.
Additional Collector Stamps , Jaipur.
The Sub Registrar, SR IV, Jaipur, did number accept the valuation 1.
The appellant also stated in her reply that adjacent to the plot purchased by her, Plot Nos.
No.12, Roop Sagar, at a price less than the price in the Sale Deed dated 16.05.2007 under which she had purchased Plot No.
Aggrieved, the appellant filed SB Civil Writ Petition No.12422 of 2009 before the Rajasthan High Court challenging the order dated 20.07.2009 of the 1.
The appellant then filed D.B. Civil Appeal Writ No.1261 of 2009 before the Division Bench of the High Court, but by order dated 22.03.2010 the Division Bench of the High Court held that there was numbererror or illegality apparent on the face of the record in the order dated 21.10.2009 passed by the learned Single Judge and that the appeal was devoid of any merit and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
A 3 near Scheme No.12, Roop Sagar, had been sold by a registered Sale Deed on 16.12.2006 and another Plot No.
Along with the reply, the appellant had also furnished companyies of the two Sale Deeds of the adjacent Plot Nos.
made in the Sale Deed and appointed an Inspection Officer to inspect the plot purchased by the appellant and determined the value of the land at Rs.2,58,44,260/ .
The Additional Collector Stamps heard the appellant and in his order dated 20.07.2009 held after companysidering the Site Inspection Report that the determination made by the Sub Registrar at Rs.
A 3 and A 38 in Scheme No.12.
2,58,44,260/ was companyrect and that the appellant was liable to pay deficit stamp duty of Rs.15,62,880/ , deficit registration charges of Rs.7,000/ and penalty of Rs.120/ totalling to a sum of Rs.15,70,000/ and accordingly made the demand on the appellant and directed recovery of the same.
A 38, near Scheme 1.
The Additional Collector Stamps , Jaipur, served a numberice under the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 fo short the Act to the appellant on 07.07.2008 to appear before him on 19.09.2008 and to show cause why prosecution against the appellant should number be initiated for companycealing or misrepresenting facts relating to the valuation mentioned in the Sale Deed resulting in evasion of stamp duty.
A 7 in Housing Scheme No.12.
Aggrieved, the appellant has filed Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. C No.17233 of 2010.
The Sale Deed was executed on a stamp duty of Rs.1,17,000/ .
The appellant filed a reply stating therein that the plot of land purchased by her under the Sale Deed was allotted to her for residential purposes and was number meant for companymercial use and that the sale price was paid entirely by a cheque.
In the reply, the appellant requested the Additional Collector Stamps to drop the recovery proceedings.
K. PATNAIK, J. Leave granted.
The appellant purchased Plot No.
A 7 situated in the Housing Scheme No.12, Ajmer Road, Jaipur, of Krishna Grah Nirman Sahakari Samiti Limited by a registered Sale Deed dated 16.05.2007 for a companysideration of Rs.18 lacs.
In the meanwhile, the appellant filed a separate Writ Petition D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.14220 of 2009 in the Rajasthan High Court challenging the companystitutional validity of the proviso to Section 65 1 of the Rajasthan Stamp Act, 1998 for short the Act , which provided that numberrevision application shall be entertained unless it is accompanied by a satisfactory proof of the payment of fifty percent of the recoverable amount.
