JUDGMENT : 1. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that despite several directions of this Court, the respondent has failed to assess the stamp duty on a decree, on which the petitioner sought an opinion under Section 31 of the Indian Stamp Act, in accordance with the correct law governing in the field. It is submitted by learned Senior Counsel that, upon directions of Court, several valuations were furnished by the respondent before this Court, none of which were in consonance with the stamp duty prevalent on the date when the partition decree, which is sought to be evaluated, was passed. Such an approach of the respondent ought to be deprecated as per submission of the learned Senior Counsel of the petitioner. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, in his usual fairness, submits that the law is that the valuation of stamp duty has to be in terms of the duty prevalent at the juncture when the “instrument” was executed, in the present case the date of the decree sought to be evaluated. In view of the law being so, there is no use in keeping the matter pending unnecessarily. 3. W.P. No. 290 of 2019 is disposed of by directing the respondent to assess the stamp duty of the partition decree, in respect of which an opinion was sought by the petitioner under Section 31 of the Indian Stamp Act, and to intimate the same to the petitioner, within three weeks from date. 4. It is made clear that the time limit stipulated above is preemptory and shall be mandatorily complied with by the respondent. 5. There will be no order as to costs. 6. Urgent certified copies of this order, if applied for, be made available to the parties upon compliance of requisite formalities.