JUDGMENT Narayan Shukla,J.: - Heard Mr. Nitin Srivastava, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Rohit Verma, learned Standing Counsel. 2. Through the instant writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated 02.06.2007 passed by the Collector (Stamp) whereby he has assessed deficiency of stamp duty amounting to Rs. 23,307/- as well as penalty thereon of the same very amount and also the order dated 19.09.2007 passed by the Commissioner, Devi Patan Division, Gonda up helding the same in appeal. The dispute relates to the determination of the stamp duty on the event of registration of a document purported to be a lease of 29 years. It is not in dispute that there is also an agreement between the parties for extension of lease for the next period of 29 years subject to wish of lessee. From the recital of the documents it is obvious that it is a lease of 29 years, secondly the lessee has been given right to get it extended for the same very period on the same terms and conditions subject to payment of 10% excess amount on presentation of the documents for its registration. 3. The petitioner prepared a lease deed and paid the stamp duty as provided under Article 35 1B of the Indian Stampt Act for the period of 29 years only. However, on presentation of its registration the Stamp Collector has treated the documents as a lease in perpetuity and accordingly demanded the stamp duty as is provided under Article 35 1B (v) of the Indian Stamp Act. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has disputed the aforesaid assessment on the ground that the period of lease is not in definite as firstly it is for 29 years and secondly there is a clause of its renewal on certain conditions but for the same very period only, therefore it cannot be said that it is a lease in perpetuity. In support of his submission he cited a decision of Division Bench of this Court given in the case of Gopal Swarup Chaturvedi Vs. In support of his submission he cited a decision of Division Bench of this Court given in the case of Gopal Swarup Chaturvedi Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in [2007(102) RD 574] in which the Division Bench of this Court has held that it is settled principle of law that renewal of lease in law amounts to grant of fresh lease and the right to renewal does not create any interest in the property nor does it amount to transfer, rather it is the document which itself examined, for determining the property, the amount of stamp duty to be paid. It is further stated by him that firstly the lease shall determine after expiry of 29 years, if not renewed for the next 29 years if it is renewed so then it shall expire on the determination of the its next extended period but anyhow it shall not prolonged after expiry of the period of 29 years + 29 years. 5. On the other hand Mr. Rohit Verma, learned Standing Counsel submitted that the intention of the documents is very clear at the parties on creation of the documents intended to lease out the land for 29 years subject to clause of renewal for the next 29 years on the wishes of lessee, therefore, the language of the documents itself speaks that there is an agreement between the parties for renewal of lease for next time with certain conditions. More over there is no room for the lessor to deny from renewal if the lessee wishes so, therefore definitely it is term as a lease deed for 29 years and agreement to let it on lease for next 29 years. 6. The Article 35 of Schedule 1B of Indian Stamp Act is extracted below: - 35. Lease, including an under-lease or sub-lease and any agreement to let or sublet- (a) where by such lease the rent is fixed and no premium is paid or delievered- (i) where the lease purports to be for a term not exceed one year The same duty as a Bond (No.15), for the whole amount payable or deliverable under such lease. Lease, including an under-lease or sub-lease and any agreement to let or sublet- (a) where by such lease the rent is fixed and no premium is paid or delievered- (i) where the lease purports to be for a term not exceed one year The same duty as a Bond (No.15), for the whole amount payable or deliverable under such lease. (ii) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding one year but not exceed five year The same duty as a conveyance [(No.23 clause (a)], for a consideration equal to three times the amount or value of the average annual rent reserved (iii) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding five years, but not exceeding ten years. [The same duty as a conveyance [(No. 23 clause (a)] for a consideration equal to four times the amount or value of the average annual rent reserved.] (iv) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding ten years, but no exceeding twenty years [The same duty as a conveyance [(No.23 clause (a)], for a consideration equal to five times the amount or value of the average annual rent reserved.] (v)where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding twenty years, but not exceeding thirty years [The same duty as a conveyance [No.23 clause(a)], for a consideration equal to six times the amount or value of the average annual rent reserved.] [(vi) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding thirty years or in perpetuity or does not purports to be for any definite term. The same duty a Conveyance No.23 clause (a) for a consideration equal to the market value of the property which is the subject of the lease.] [(b) where the lease is granted for a fine or premium or for money advanced and where no rent is reserved- (i) where the lease purports to be for a term not exceeding thirty year; The same duty as conveyance (No.23 clause (a), for a consideration equal to the amount or value of such fine or premium or advance as set forth in the lease. (ii) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding thirty years; The same duty as a conveyance No. 23 clause (a) for a consideration equal to the market value of the property which is subject of the lease. (ii) where the lease purports to be for a term exceeding thirty years; The same duty as a conveyance No. 23 clause (a) for a consideration equal to the market value of the property which is subject of the lease. (c) where the lease is granted for a fine or premium or for money advanced in addition to rent reserved,- (i) where the lease purports to be for a term not exceeding thirty years; The same duty as a conveyance [No.23 clause (a)] for a consideration equal to the amount or value of such fine or premium or advance as set forth in the lease, in addition to the duty which would have been payable on such lease, if no fine or premium or advance had been paid or delivered : Provided that in a case when an agreement to lease is stamped with the ad valorem stamp required for lease, and a lease in pursuance of such agreement is subsequently executed, the duty on such lease shall not exceed fifty rupees. (ii) where the lease purports to be for term exceeding thirty years; The same duty as a conveyance [No.23 clause (a)] for a consideration equal to the market value of the property which is subject of the lease 7. On the basis of aforesaid facts he submitted that even if it is not a lease in perpetuity but there is no doubt in the language of the deed that it is a lease of 29 years and agreement of let it on lease for next 29 years, therefore, the stamp duty shall be payable on the said document according to provisions of Article 35 1B. In support of his submissions he also cited a decision of this Court given in the case of Satya Vijay Vs. State of U.P. and others reported in 2012 (6) AWC 5534 in which this Court has held that whenever in a lease there is stipulation either for renewal or extension of lease on the expiry of the period of lease it would be composite instrument of lease and agreement to let and both are chargeable to stamp duty under Article 35 schedule 1B of the Act. He further submitted that on expiry of first 29 years in terms of agreement the parties have to create a fresh lease for next 29 years. 8. He further submitted that on expiry of first 29 years in terms of agreement the parties have to create a fresh lease for next 29 years. 8. In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances the orders impugned are hereby modified to the extent that the lease deed in question shall be treated as a lease for 29 years and the agreement to let on lease for next 29 years and therefore the stamp duty would be liable to by paid in accordance with the Article 35 schedule 1B of the Indian Stamp Act. It is clarified that in any manner the lease in question is not a lease in perpetuity. 9. With the aforesaid modification of the orders impugned the writ petition stands disposed of finally.