Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 1134 (ALL)

Sanjay Maheshwari v. State Of U. P.

2021-09-28

AJAY BHANOT

body2021
JUDGMENT : 1. The order dated 30.10.2017 passed by the Collector (Stamps)/ District Magistrate, Moradabad found that there is an old dilapidated boundary wall around the disputed land. Further the existence of sugar cane crushing equipment attests the fact that the land was not being used for agricultural purposes. On this footing it was found that the land was not agricultural land. The valuation of the land comprised in the instrument was accordingly made and the stamp liability was then determined. 2. The appellate authority agreed with the findings of the adjudicating authority in the impugned judgment dated 20.09.2018 and affirmed its judgment. 3. Heard Sri Pawan Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Sanjay Goswami, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State. 4. The appellate authority neglected to consider the fact that parcel of land comprised in the instrument had been declared as land to be used for agricultural propose by the competent authority in proceedings taken out under Section 144 of the U.P.Z.A.& L.R. Act by the judgment dated 19.07.2013. The sale deed was executed on 30.06.2015. The Collector Stamps/ Adjudicating authority as well as the appellate authority cannot overreach the findings and declaration regarding agricultural usage of land entered by the competent authority in proceedings under Section 144 of the U.P. Z.A & L.R. Act. 5. Production of jaggery on small scale is an agricultural activity undertaken by small farmers. This is clearly distinguishable from large scale industrial production of jaggery. There is no finding that the in the case at hand at any point in time large scale production of jaggery by industrial process was being made on the disputed parcel of land. No existence of any industrial unit capable of such large scale production has been recorded in the impugned order or disclosed from the record. Small scale production of jaggery is often made by various village households. The same cannot be categorized as industrial activity for the purposes of the Indian Stamp Act. 6. In the wake of preceding discussion the impugned orders dated 20.09.2018 passed by respondent No. 2/ Commissioner Moradabad Mandal Moradabad as well as order dated 30.10.2017 and 07.02.2018 passed by respondent No. 3/ Collector Moradabad are arbitrary and illegal and are liable to be set aside and are set aside. 7. The matter is remitted to the respondent no. 6. In the wake of preceding discussion the impugned orders dated 20.09.2018 passed by respondent No. 2/ Commissioner Moradabad Mandal Moradabad as well as order dated 30.10.2017 and 07.02.2018 passed by respondent No. 3/ Collector Moradabad are arbitrary and illegal and are liable to be set aside and are set aside. 7. The matter is remitted to the respondent no. 3/ Collector (Stamps)/ District Magistrate, Moradabad with the following directions: (1) The respondent No. 3 shall decide the controversy within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order downloaded from the official website of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. The concerned Court/ Authority/ Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing. (2) The respondent No. 3 shall give due opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. (3) The respondent No. 3 shall decide the controversy consistent with the observations made in this judgment. (4) The land comprised in the offending instrument shall be treated as agricultural land for the purpose of valuation of property. (5) The existence of sugar cane crushers for production of jaggery, in the facts of this case shall not be treated as proof of industrial activity on the disputed parcel of land. 8. The writ petition is allowed to the extent indicated above.