Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.
2. The petitioner has stated that by a Document, dated 27.9.1900, registered as Document No.1264/1900, on the file of the Sub Registrar, Sembium, the property bearing Door No.57, Rangasayee Naidu Street, formerly known as Suraya Street, Mettupallam, Siruvellore, had been purchased from and out of the Udayavar Fund maintained by the then Trustees Mathereddy Chennakesavalu Naidu and others. Similarly, by a Document No.1266/1900, the house and premises bearing Door No.26, Siruvellore High Road, Siruvellore Village, had been purchased from and out of the Udayavar Fund. The object of the Udayavar Fund was to perform Arudhra Darsanam festival of Sri Chenna Mallikeswaraswamy Temple, the third and the fifth day Udayavar festival in Sri Chenna Kesava Perumal Temple and to provide educational facilities for the members of Bunder Adhivelaman Community. The said activities had been carried on between the years 1900 to 1966. Thereafter, the members of the community had felt that an association could take care of the performance of the Trust.
3. The Association which was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, had become a Society, under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. Since the said Society had become defunct in carrying on the functions relating to the object of the Trust the petitioner wanted to execute a deed of declaration of Trust, dated 27.3.1997. However, in spite of the various representations having been made to the respondents, no action had been taken by them to register the Trust Deed, as requested by the petitioner. Instead, the impugned letter, dated Nil.11.2001, had been issued by the third respondent, asking the petitioner to produce various particulars and documents, without having the jurisdiction to do so.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that there is no necessity for the third respondent to conduct a detailed enquiry, based on the particulars to be produced by the petitioner. Such an enquiry is required only if the stamp duty is to be assessed on the market value of the property that is being conveyed. According to
Article 64 of Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, only a sum of Rs.180/- is payable as stamp duty. In fact, before the amendment of the Article, with effect from 11.7.2001, the maximum amount payable was only Rs.90/-.
5. It has been further contended that the third respondent is the Collector, under
Section 2(9) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. When there is a doubt about the quantum of stamp duty to be charged in respect of a document, the third respondent is to send it to the first respondent for the purpose of obtaining a decision. Thereafter, the third respondent should proceed to assess and charge the duty, if any, in conformity with the said decision. Under
Section 57(1) of the Act, the first respondent can refer the matter to the High Court, with his opinion, if the first respondent is not in a position to decide the matter.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that this Court may be pleased to pass an order, as prayed for by the petitioner, by specifying a time limit, within which the process could be completed.
7. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioner, as well as the respondents, the impugned letter No.397/97, dated Nil.11.2001, issued by the third respondent, is set aside and the third respondent is directed to draw up a statement of the case, with regard to the document in question and to refer it, with his opinion, for the decision of the first respondent, in accordance with
Section 56(2) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On receipt of the statement, the first respondent shall consider the case and send a copy of its decision to the third respondent, in accordance with Clause 3 of
Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, within a period of 12 weeks thereafter. On receipt of the decision of the first respondent, the third respondent shall proceed to assess and charge the duty, if any, in conformity with such decision and pass the necessary orders, expeditiously. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs.
csh To
1.The Inspector General of Registration, Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Santhome High Road, Chennai-28.
2.The Registrar of Assurance (North Chennai) Asst. Inspector General of Registration.
3.The Sub Registrar of Assurance (Collector) Sembium, Chennai 600 011