1994 PLP 1864 (MLD)

This judgment will also dispose of Writ Petition No.5920 of 1992 and Writ Petition No.12250 of 1992 as common questions of law and facts have been raised in all of them.

2. The facts of the case are that the petitioners in all these writ petitions obtained a decree for Specific Performance of agreement from a Civil Court. In execution of the said decree the Court executed sale-deed in favour of the petitioners on behalf of the vendor for transfer of property in consideration of the amount mentioned in the agreement of sale which was ordered to be enforced.

3. When the said sale-deeds were presented before the Sub-Registrar for registration, he declined to do so unless ad valorem stamp duty was paid according to the valuation table regarding value of the property prepared by the Collector under section 27-A of the Stamp Act, 1899 as against the Stamp Duty paid on the basis of amount of consideration mentioned in the sale-deeds which act has been brought under challenge in these Constitutional petitions.

4. The validity of the said valuation table prepared by the Collector was challenged in Writ Petition No.3163 of 1992. It was held that, before the said valuation table and the rates fixed therein regarding value of the property at which ad valorem stamp duty was to be paid it was necessary to notify it and regarding the said valuation table the said requirement of law had not been fulfilled. The said writ petition was accepted through judgment dated 10-5-1993 and learned Assistant Advocate-General when asked frankly admitted that the Provincial Government did not challenge the sane in appeal as such the same, still holds the field.

5. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as follows:

"Para. 14. "Even if it be assumed that the publication in the official Gazette of the valuation table was not necessary, it cannot be seriously disputed in the presence of the word "notified" in section 27-A that the information about the valuation table and the rate fixed therein must have been conveyed to the public in general, though some method by which it could be made known. In the present case, the learned Additional Advocate-General himself stated that he had repeatedly instructed the respondents to produce the record to show that the valuation table has been published either by its publication in the newspaper or by making the contents by customary method, like beating of drums or affixation of the table at public place. Unfortunately, no such record was produced and there is nothing to show that the contents of the valuation table were either brought to the notice of the public or to the residents of the locality to which it related. It appears that no attention was paid to this aspect of the matter and the valuation table was only conveyed to the concerned officers. That being so, the valuation table issued by the Collector cannot be said to have been notified and is, therefore, of no legal effect."

6. In view of the declaration made by this Court in the said writ petition that the valuation table and the rates fixed therein issued by the Collector was of no legal effect, the petitioners could not have been directed to pay the Stamp Duty on the basis of the said valuation table and the rates fixed in it. I do not feel persuaded to take a different view.

7. These writ petitions are accepted. The demand of the Collector from A the petitioners to pay ad valorem Stamp Duty on the basis of valuation table and the rates fixed in it regarding value of the properties is hereby declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. The respondents are hereby directed to register the documents in accordance with law on the payment of ad valorem stamp duty according to the value of the property mentioned in each document itself. The parties are left to bear their own costs. H.B.T./S-465/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition accepted.