Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 15 (2.99 seconds)Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Urban Land (Ceiling And Regulation) Act, 1976
R. Sai Bharathi vs J. Jayalalitha & Ors on 24 November, 2003
39. As held in R. Sai Bharathi ( 6 supra), the guideline value is a
rate fixed by the authorities under the Stamp Act for purposes of
determining the true market value of the property disclosed in an
instrument requiring payment of stamp duty; that the guideline value
::20:: MSR,J
crp_3373_2016&batch
fixed is not final but only a prima facie rate prevailing in an area; and
it is open to the registering authority as well as the person seeking
registration to prove the actual market value of the property. It held
that the authorities cannot regard the guideline valuation as the last
word on the subject of market value, that the guideline value is not
sacrosanct, but only a factor to be taken note of, if at all available in
respect of an area in which the property transferred lies. So the 2nd
petitioner cannot treat the guideline market value as sacrosanct and
proceed to refer it under Sec.47-A to the Collector.
State Of U.P. & Ors vs Ambrish Tandon & Anr on 20 January, 2012
In State of U.P. v. Ambrish Tandon8, the Supreme Court held
that nature of user which is relatable to the date of purchase is only
relevant for the purpose of calculation of stamp duty under Section
47-A of the Stamp Act and not the user of the property for a different
purpose at a later point of time. It held :
Collector Of Nilgiris At Ootacamund vs Mahavir Plantations Pvt. Ltd. on 12 January, 1981
44. The Madras High Court in Collector of Nilgiris vs. Mahaveer
Plantations Ltd11 had held that Market Value Guidelines are
intended merely to assist the sub-Registrars to find out prima facie
whether the market value set forth in the instruments had been set
forth correctly and they are not intended as a substitute for market
value or to foreclose the enquiry by the Collector which he is under a
duty to make under Section 47-A of the Act, when once a reference
comes to him from the registering authority. It held that the Collector,
under Section 47-A, cannot shirk his responsibility of determining the
market value by adopting the guidelines, nor can he fix the market
value without proper materials and evidence to support it. It held that
11
A.I.R. 1982 Madras 138
::22:: MSR,J
crp_3373_2016&batch
the very idea of an enquiry contemplated by Section 47-A and the
detailed procedure prescribed in the Rules is that the Collector's
findings must be verifiable evidence.
State Of M.P. And Anr. vs P.B. Menon And Ors. on 22 January, 2003
59. As held in State of M.P. and another vs. P.B. Menon and
others12, jurisdiction under Article 226 / 227 is limited to errors of
jurisdiction and the High Court cannot interfere with the orders passed
by the Court below unless it is wholly perverse or unrealistic.
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Sagar Cements Limited vs Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board ... on 7 February, 2003
26. The decision in Sagar Cements Ltd ( 2 Supra) was approved
by the Supreme Court in Jawajee Nagnatham vs. Revenue
Divisional Officer, Adilabad, A.P. and others4. The Supreme Court
held that Basic Value Register maintained by the registering authority
for collection of stamp duty has no statutory foundation for
determination of market value under Section 23 of the Land
Acquisition Act, 1894 and Section 47-A of the Stamp Act does not
confer power on the Government to determine market value of an
entire area, region or block.