Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:14829 Court No. - 19 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 2391 of 2025 Petitioner :- Samima Khatoon And 2 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Revenue Deptt. Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Om Prakash Yadav,Tulsi Ram Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Manish Mathur,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for petitioners and Mr. Devendra Mohan Shukla, learned counsel for opposite parties. 2. Petition has been filed challenging order dated 04.10.2021 passed under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act indicating deficiency in stamp duty pertaining to sale deed dated 08.03.2016 executed in favour of petitioners. Also under challenge is the order dated 20.09.2024 passed under Section 56 of the Act rejecting petitioners' appeal. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that authorities concerned have completely lost sight of the fact that trees which were existing on plot in question being Gata No. 1598 and 1610 were in fact dried up and although plots in question were in proximity of the abadi area, adequate stamp duty had been paid for the same whereas the sale deed also clearly indicated the fact that plots were situated adjacent to a rasta and not a khadanja marg, which it is stated was constructed subsequently as would be evident from the fact that despite the fact that sale deed was executed in the year 2016, the report was submitted in the year 2019. 4. Learned State Counsel has refuted submissions advanced by learned counsel for petitioners with the submission that the factum that plots in question were adjacent to abadi area has clearly been admitted by petitioners in their objections in proceedings under Section 47-A of the Act. It is submitted that the aspect of whether the plots were adjacent to a kaccha rasta (unmetalled road) or a khadanja marg, the burden was upon petitioner to prove the same, which has not been discharged. 5. Upon consideration of submissions advanced by learned counsel for parties and perusal of material on record, particularly the impugned orders, it is evident that additional stamp duty has been imposed upon petitioners primarily on the ground that plots in question had certain trees over them, proximity to abadi area and situation adjacent to a khadanja marg. 6. A perusal of objections filed by petitioners reveal the fact that aforesaid aspects have in fact being admitted by petitioners in paragraphs 6 and 7 of objections dated 03.09.2021. 7. So far as the question whether the khadanja road was constructed before or after the execution of sale deed, in the considered opinion of this Court, the burden was upon petitioners to prove the same, which has not been discharged. 8. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances and particularly the admission of petitioners, this Court does not find any occasion to interfere with the orders impugned. 9. The petition, therefore, lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed. Parties to bear their own cost. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Satish Digitally signed by :- SATISH KUMAR BHARATI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench