Maheswari vs The Inspector General Of ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 14193 Mad

                                                             W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                              DATED : 06.11.2023

                                                     CORAM

                          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANAND VENKATESH

                                W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021
                  W.P.(MD)No.13903 of 2021

                  Maheswari                                                ... Petitioner
                                                      Vs

                  1.The Inspector General of Registration,
                    100, Santhome High Road,
                    Mullima Nagar,
                    Mandavelipakkam,
                    Raja Annamalai Puram,
                    Chennai - 600028.

                  2.The Special Deputy Collector
                        (Registration),
                    District Collector Complex,
                    Virudhunagar.

                  3.The Sub Registrar
                    Sub Registrar Office,
                    Kunoor Registration Office,
                    Kunoor, Virudhunagar District.                        ...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to release the petitioner’s Registered sale deed in Doc.No.987 of 2020 dated 05.12.2019 and to refund the Additional Stamp Duty of Rs.6,83,300/- paid by the petitioner as per the demand of the 2nd and 3rd respondents within a time stipulated by this Court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Special Government Pleader

W.P.(MD)No.13912 of 2021

Kaleeswari ... Petitioner Vs

1.The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai - 600028.

2.The Special Deputy Collector (Registration), District Collector Complex, Virudhunagar.

3.The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Kunoor Registration Office, Kunoor, Virudhunagar District. ...Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the 3rd respondent to release the petitioner’s Registered sale deed in Doc.No.2236 of 2020 dated 14.10.2020 and to refund the Additional Stamp Duty of Rs.7,13,300/- paid by the petitioner as per the demand of the 2nd and 3rd respondents within a time stipulated by this Court.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

For Petitioner : Mr.P.M.Vishnuvarthanan

For Respondents : Mr.A.K.Manikkam, Special Government Pleader

COMMON ORDER

The issue involved in both these writ petitions are common and

hence, they are taken up together, heard and disposed of through this

common order.

2. The petitioners have filed these Writ Petitions seeking for the

issue of writ of mandamus directing the third respondent to release the sale

deeds in pending Document Nos.987 and 2236 of 2020 and to refund the

additional stamp duty paid by the petitioners.

3. The case of the petitioners is that they were declared as

successful bidders in the auction conducted by the Bank pursuant to the

initiation of the SARFEASI proceedings. The sale was confirmed and the

Sale Certificates were also issued in favour of the petitioners. When the

petitioners presented the sale certificates before the third respondent, the

third respondent insisted that the stamp duty must be paid based on the

market value of the property and accordingly, the documents were kept /

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

retained as pending documents. The petitioners were also directed to pay the

additional stamp duty which was also paid by the petitioners, pending Writ

Petitions.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted

that during the pendency of these Writ Petitions, the petitioners were in

urgent need of the documents and therefore, the petitioners had paid the

entire stamp duty and the registration charges and the sale deeds were also

registered and released in favour of the petitioners.

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf

of the respondents submitted that by virtue of the Full Bench Judgment of

this Court in the case of Dr.R.Thiagarajan Vs. the Inspector General of

Registration, Santhome, Chennai – 4 and two others reported in [2019 (4)

CTC 839], the sale certificate is compulsorily registrable and that the

petitioners have to pay the entire stamp duty and the registration charges.

Therefore, the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that nothing

survives in these Writ Petitions, since the stamp duty has already been paid

and the documents have already been registered and released to the

petitioners.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

6. In the considered view of this Court, the Full Bench

Judgment that was referred by the learned Special Government Pleader did

not take any consideration the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the

case of Esjaypee Impex Private Limited Vs. Assistant General Manager

and Authorised Officer, Canara Bank reported in 2021 (2) CTC 493. This

was taken into consideration by the learned Single Bench of this Court in the

case of Bell Tower Enterprises LLP Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu reported

in 2022 (5) CTC 454 and it was categorically held that the sale certificate

does not require any compulsorily registration and that it is enough, if the

same is recorded under Section 89 of the Registration Act, 1908 in Book

No.1 which does not attract any stamp duty. This Judgment was

subsequently followed by another learned Single Judge of this Court in the

case of N.C.Suresh Kumar and Others Vs. the Inspector General of

Registration and Others reported in (2023) 5 MLJ 176.

7. In view of the above, the sale certificates that were issued in

favour of the petitioners are not compulsorily registrable documents and as

consequence, there is no question of payment of stamp duty and it is enough,

if the entries are made in Book No.1 under Section 89 of the Registration

Act, 1908. Therefore, the petitioners will be entitled for the refund of the

stamp duty that was paid by the petitioners.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

8. In view of the above, there shall be a direction to the

petitioners to make a representation to the third respondent, viz., the Sub

Registrar, Kunoor Registration Office, Kunoor, Virudhunagar District,

seeking for the refund of the stamp duty that was paid by the petitioners.

The Sub Registrar on receipt of the representation is directed to deal with the

same in line with the Judgments of this Court in the case of Bell Tower

Enterprises LLP Vs. the State of Tamil Nadu reported in 2022 (5) CTC 454

and in the case of N.C.Suresh Kumar and Others Vs. the Inspector General

of Registration and Others reported in (2023) 5 MLJ 176, wherein, it was

held that the sale certificate is not a compulsorily registrable document and a

decision shall be taken within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of

receipt of the representation from the petitioner.

9. Both these Writ Petitions are disposed of in the above terms.

No costs.

06.11.2023

NCC:yes/no Index:yes/no Internet:yes/no tsg

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

To

1.The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar, Mandavelipakkam, Raja Annamalai Puram, Chennai - 600028.

2.The Special Deputy Collector (Registration), District Collector Complex, Virudhunagar.

3.The Sub Registrar Sub Registrar Office, Kunoor Registration Office, Kunoor, Virudhunagar District.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

N.ANAND VENKATESH, J.

tsg

W.P.(MD)Nos.13903 & 13912 of 2021

06.11.2023

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis