Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.69 seconds)
Aniruddha Kumar And Ashwini Kumar vs Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, ... on 19 July, 2000
cites
The Indian Stamp Act, 1899
P.Ram Reddy Etc vs Land Acquisition Officer Hyderabad on 27 January, 1995
19. In the present case, the market value is to be determined on the basis of the value that would satisfy the vendor. Thus, the question of future potential cannot be a factor for determining the market value of such a land for the purpose of stamp duty payable under the Stamp Act. The vendee pays the price that satisfies the vendor and, therefore, it is the utility of the land as on the date of transfer by the vendor and as such, if the land was an agricultural land, it has to be treated as such and the valuation has to be done accordingly. Whether in future the purchaser puts the land into residential use or changes the character is immaterial for the purpose of payment of stamp duty. The principle that has been laid down in P. Ram Reddy (supra) can be attracted for the purpose of determining the market value only to the extent of potential as on the date of transfer and not beyond. Thus, the market value has to be determined according to the factors, which includes the situation of the land, the amenities available in and around and various other factors, including the close proximity of the residential area as well as any transfer made immediately before the transfer or after the transfer in close proximity if such documents are produced in respect of the area that similarly situated land by either of the parties.
Smt.Prakashwati vs Chief Controlling Revenue ... on 9 July, 1996
In the case of Prakashwati v. Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. Board of Revenue, Allahabad. 1996 AWC 1331, the Apex Court had held that situation of a property in an area close to a decent colony not by itself would make it part thereof and should not be a factor for approach of the authority in determining the market value. According to the said decision, valuation has to be determined on constructive materials which could be made available before the authorttises concerned.
Section 27 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Section 64 in The Indian Stamp Act, 1899 [Entire Act]
Kaka Singh vs The Additional Collector And District ... on 29 August, 1985
Thus, I am fortified on my view which I have taken above by the ratio decidendl in the decision in the case of Koka Singh (supra), as laid down in paragraph 15 thereof.
The Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Smt. Indumati Chitaley vs Government Of India & Anr on 1 November, 1995
In order to advance his contention, Mr. Kesarl had relied on a decision in the case of Smt. Indumati Chitaley v. Government of India and another, AIR 1996 SC 531. to contend that the valuation of the land cannot be determined on the basis of square metre but has to be determined on the basis of acre as unit for valuation. But the distinctive feature with regard to the facts of the said case is that it was a large chunk of agricultural land measuring about 17.57 acres. Whereas the present land is only 599 square metre, equivalent to 5 bis was. Therefore, this decision may not help Mr. Kesari in the present case. However, Mr. Kesari had also sought to draw inspiration from this decision to the extent that when the land is agricultural land recorded in the
revenue records even though situated in town area, cannot be treated as a land other than agricultural land. There might be some substance in the submission of Mr. Kesarl having regard to Section 64 of the Urban Area Zamindari Abolition Act. but "then for our present purpose. it would not be necessary to go into the said question.
1