Judgments
Judgments
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Madras High Court
  4. /
  5. 2017
  6. /
  7. January

Mrs.Mahadevi vs The District Revenue Officer ...

Madras High Court|04 August, 2017

JUDGMENT / ORDER

There is no representation for the petitioner.
2.The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging the reference under section 47(A)(1) of Indian Stamp Act of the sale deed dated 05.02.2004 which was presented for registration by her.
3.Today, the learned Counsel for the respondent placed before this Court proceedings dated 05.10.2007 bearing No.137/2007 sent by the respondents to the Government Pleaders Office informing them that subsequent to reference under Section 47(A)(1), the petitioner paid the deficit Stamp Duty and Registration Fees on 28.04.2005 under the Samadhan Scheme in G.O.Ms.No.193 Commercial Taxes Department dated 28.11.2004 and collected the document on 28.04.2005 itself.
4.According to the learned Counsel for the respondents, as the document has been delivered to the petitioner nothing survives in this writ petition it has become infructuous. This Court is also of the same view. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are also closed.
04.08.2017 Pam Index: Yes/No Internet: Yes/No W.P.No.14917 of 2004 and W.P.M.P.Nos.17702 & 17703 of 2004 To
1.The District Revenue Officer (Stamps) Singaravelar Maaligai, 32, Rajaji Salai, Chennai  600 001.
2.The Sub-Registrar of Registration, Thousand Lights, Chennai  600 018.
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J.
Pam W.P.No.14917 of 2004 and W.P.M.P.Nos.17702 & 17703 of 2004 04.08.2017
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

Mrs.Mahadevi vs The District Revenue Officer ...

Court

Madras High Court

JudgmentDate
04 August, 2017