Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Dismissed".

All the pleas raised by Mr. Handa stand determined in Sukhjit Singh Cheema's case (supra) and M/s Ralla Ram Ram Lal's case (supra).

At this stage, counsel for the petitioner has relied upon V.N. Devadoss v. Chief Revenue Control Officer-cum-Ins. And Others 2009(3) Recent Civil Reports 496 to contend that where a property was sold in an auction by the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction, the stand of the State that the Collector rates shall prevail and the actual price was not accepted. That case pertain to State of Tamil Nadu. State of Punjab has carried an amendment to Section 47A. The wording of Section produced in the judgment rendered in V.N. Devadoss's case (supra) and prevailing Section in the State of Punjab are entirely different. The amendment was made in the provision and it was held therein that Collector rate is to prevail irrespective of the market value. This amendment was considered in Sukhjit Singh Cheema's case (supra) and M/s Ralla Ram Ram Lal's case (supra). Therefore, on the facts of the case judgment rendered in V.N. Devadoss's case (supra) is not attracted and petitioner cannot draw any support from it.