Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2009
  6. /
  7. January

Kalith vs The Special Deputy Collector ...

Madras High Court|07 December, 2009

JUDGMENT / ORDER

Heard Mr.T.S.Mohamed Mohideen, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr.Pala Ramasamy, the learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents.
2. This writ petition has been filed praying for a writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to remove the endorsement made, under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, and to release the registered sale deed No.1800 of 2008, dated 28.11.2008.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the property in Survey Nos.15/4, 14/1, 16/2, 15/1 and 19/1, at Pulankudiyiruppu Village, Shencottai Taluk, Tirunelveli District, had been purchased by the petitioner, under a sale deed, dated 21.10.2008, for a valid consideration of Rs.97,00,000/- . The document had been presented for registration before the second respondent, on 28.11.2008, and had been registered as document No.1800 of 2008, and a stamp duty of Rs.7,76,000/-, had been paid in the office of the second respondent. However, the second respondent, after registering the said document had with held the document stating that the document had been undervalued and referred it to the first respondent, under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. Thereafter, notice had been issued by the first respondent, to the petitioner, under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, valuing the land purchased by the petitioner at Rs.2,54,65,653/-, with the stamp duty at Rs.12,61,255/-, and he had asked the petitioner to submit his objections. In such circumstances, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition before this Court, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents, on instructions, had submitted that the respondents have no objections for releasing the document, with document No.1800 of 2008. However, he had submitted that the document would be released only with the necessary endorsements. The final amount to be paid by the petitioner, as stamp duty, would be subject to the 47-A proceedings pending before the first respondent.
5. In view of the averments made by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the submissions made by the learned Special Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondents, the respondents are directed to release the document bearing document No.1800 of 2008, registered before the second respondent, on 28.11.2008, to the petitioner, with the necessary endorsements.
6. The said directions are issued subject to the following conditions: (1)The first respondent shall release the sale deed registered as document No.1800 of 2008, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, with an endorsement stating that the reference, under Section 47(A)(1), is pending.
(2)The first respondent shall also make necessary entries in the registers showing the pendency of the proceedings, under Section 47(A)(1), so as to reflect the same in the encumbrance certificates, in the interest of purchasers. (3)Pending the final order to be passed, under Section 47(A)(1), there shall be a charge over the property in favour of the Government, as per Section 47(A)(4) of the Act.
(4)After completion of the entire proceedings, under Section 47(A), including the appellate remedy available under the same, the petitioners shall pay the amount which is arrived at, ultimately and after such payment, on production of the original sale deed, the first respondent shall make necessary endorsements stating that the entire amount due, as per Section 47A, has been paid and there is no amount due under the Indian Stamp Act.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs.
cs To
1.The Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) Kokkirakulam, Tirunelveli - 1.
2.The Sub-Registrar, Sub-Registrar's Office, Shencottai, Tirunelveli District.
Disclaimer: Above Judgment displayed here are taken straight from the court; Vakilsearch has no ownership interest in, reservation over, or other connection to them.
Title

Kalith vs The Special Deputy Collector ...

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
07 December, 2009