- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH WRIT PETITION NO. 1470 OF 2020 (GM-ST/RN) BETWEEN: B.K. PARVATHAMMA W/O. K V REVANNA, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS R/AT BASAVANA BEEDI, KONANDURU VILLAGE, AGRAHARA HOBLI, THIRTHAHALLI TALUK, SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, 577432 …PETITIONER (BY SMT. NIREEKSHA D.J., FOR SRI. RAKSHITH JOIS Y.P., ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA REP BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, VIDHANA SOUDHA, DR. B R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI, BENGALURU 560001 2. REGIONAL COMMISSIONER BENGALURU DIVISION, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, 2ND FOOR, SHANTINAGAR, TTMC BUILDING, KH DOUBLE ROAD, BENGLAURU 560027 Digitally signed by ARUNKUMAR M S Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 3. DISTRICT REGISTRAR, DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION SHIVAMOGGA DISTRICT, BALRAJ URS ROAD, SHIVAMOGGA 577201 4. SUB REGISTRAR, SHIVAMOGGA DEPARTMENT OF STAMPS AND REGISTRATION, ADARSHA LAYOUT, VINOBANAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA 577201 …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. MAHANTESH SHETTAR., AGA) ------- THIS W.P FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DECLARE THAT THE JUDGMENT DATED 14.10.2019 PASSED BY THE REGIONAL COMMISSIONER, THE R-2 HEREIN IN STP (A) 97/2018-19 PRODUCED AT ANNEXURE-A IS ILLEGAL AND QUASH THE SAME., AND ETC. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING IN B GROUP, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE E.S.INDIRESH - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 ORAL ORDER Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties. 2. In this petition, the petitioner claims to be the owner of the land bearing Survey No.30/1A3 situated at Alkola Village, Shivamogga Taluk and District, measuring to an extent of 01 acre 12 guntas as per the Registered Sale Deed dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure-B). It is also forthcoming from the petition that, a complaint was lodged before the respondent- Authorities stating that the property has been undervalued at the time of registration and pursuant to the same, proceedings have been initiated under Section 45-A(3) of the Karnataka Stamp Act, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 1957') by the respondent- Authorities. Respondent No.3 vide Order dated 21.01.2019 (Annexure-D) passed an Order stating that, the Registered Sale Deed dated 09.02.2018 is undervalued and accordingly, imposed penalty on the petitioner. Feeling aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has approached Respondent No.2-Appellate Authority in Dispute No.STP(A)/97/2018-19. Respondent No.2 vide order dated - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 14.10.2019 dismissed the appeal and feeling aggrieved by the same, petitioner has presented this writ petition. 3. Smt.Nireeksha D.J., learned counsel appearing on behalf of Sri.Rakshith Jois.Y.P., learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the Registered Sale Deed dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure-B) has been properly valued as per the Guidance Value and at the behest of the complaint filed by a third party, respondents have taken a decision in the matter and accordingly sought for interference by this Court in the subject matter. 4. Per contra, Sri.Mahantesh Shettar, learned AGA sought to justify the action of the respondents-Authorities and submitted that, though Notices under Section 45-A(3) of the Act, 1957 was issued on 30.05.2018 and 05.10.2018, the petitioner herein has neither appeared before Respondent No.3 nor contested the matter and thereafter, the impugned orders have been passed. Therefore, sought for dismissal of the petition. 5. Taking into consideration the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, it is apparent that, it is not in - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 dispute that, the petitioner had purchased the property as per the Registered Sale Deed dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure-B). It is also forthcoming from the petition that, at the instance of the complaint filed by a third party, Respondent No.3 has initiated the proceedings under Section 45-A(3) of the Act, 1957 in SMG 01/2018-19 and by Order dated 21.01.2019, Respondent No.3 has held that, the property has been undervalued to a tune of Rs.91,85,500/- and directed the petitioner herein to pay deficit Stamp Duty and Registration Fees in a sum of Rs.6,10,842/- and also imposed the penalty in a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- under Section 61(c) of the Act, 1957. On appeal being preferred, the Respondent No.2 vide judgment dated 14.10.2019 dismissed the appeal confirming the order passed by Respondent No.3. 6. On perusal of the impugned orders and having taken note of the finding recorded by both the Authorities, it is seen that the sale consideration amount mentioned in the Registered Sale Deed at Annexure-B is at Rs.46,00,000/-, which is above the Guidance Value in respect of the subject land as notified by the respondent. In that view of the matter, taking into consideration that, initiation of the proceedings against the - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 petitioner is at the instance of the complaint filed by a third party, I am of the view that, both the Authorities have committed an error in imposing the penalty on the petitioner holding that the petitioner has registered the Sale Deed (Annexure-B), which is undervalued. The said finding recorded by both the Authorities viz., Respondents no. 2 and 3 is contrary to law as the petitioner has purchased the Schedule Property as per the Registered Sale Deed dated 09.02.2018 (Annexure-B), which is above the Guidance Value and the Sale Consideration arrived at between the vendor and the purchaser (petitioner herein), is consensus ad idem and therefore I find force in the submission made by the leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner. 7. Accordingly I pass the following : ORDER. i) Writ petition is allowed; ii) The Order dated 14.10.2019 (Annexure-A) passed by Respondent No.2 and the Order dated 21.01.2019 (Annexure-D) passed by Respondent No.3 are hereby quashed; - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:46589 WP No. 1470 of 2020 iii) In view of allowing the writ petition, the petitioner is entitled for refund of penalty from the Competent Authority. SD/- (E.S.INDIRESH) JUDGE rs List No.: 1 Sl No.: 34