Madras High Court
The Sub Registrar vs S.Rathinchand on 29 November, 2023
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 29.11.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.13350 & 13459 of 2023
The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar's Office,
Sivakasi, Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.1752 of 2023
The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar's Office,
Thallakulam, Madurai District. ... Appellant in W.A.(MD)No.1767 of 2023
Vs.
1.S.RathinChand
2.R.Sukumar
3.S.Uma ... Respondents in W.A.(MD)No.1752 of 2023
Meenakshi ... Respondent in W.A.(MD)No.1767 of 2023
COMMON PRAYER: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act,
to set aside the orders passed in W.P.(MD)Nos.24379 & 24682 of 2022, dated
21.04.2023 on the file of this Court.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
For Appellants : Mr.Veera Kathiravan,
Additional Advocate General,
assisted by Mr.S.Shanmugavel,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondents : Mr.R.Shankar Ganesh
(in both W.As.)
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
These Writ Appeals have been directed against the orders dated
21.04.2023 passed in W.P.(MD)Nos.24379 & 24682 of 2022.
2.The refusal check slip issued by the appellants / Sub Registrars are
sought to be quashed in the Writ proceedings. It is not in dispute that the
respondents / auction purchasers presented sale certificates for registration under
the Registration Act, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Therefore, the
procedures contemplated under Section 89(4) of the Act would have no
application. The sale certificates presented by the auction purchasers are to be
construed as presented under Section 17 of the Act. Thus, the procedures
contemplated for registration must be followed under the Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
3.The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the appellants
mainly contended that stamp duty as required had not been paid by the
respondents. Therefore, the Registering Authority is right in issuing refusal check
slip. However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents objected the said
contention by stating that the respondents are ready and willing to pay the stamp
duty at the rate of 5% and 1% registration charges, however, the Registering
Authority is claiming over and above the charges applicable for registration of sale
certificates under Section 17 of the Act.
4.The learned Additional Advocate General for the appellants relied on
the Government Order issued in G.O.(Ms)No.28, Commercial Taxes and
Registration (J2) Department, dated 23.03.2023, wherein stamp duty has been
enhanced to 11%. However, the said Government Order was issued on
23.03.2023 and the notification issued would state that amendment shall come into
force on 23.03.2023. But in the present case, the sale certificates were presented
by the respondents long before the said Government Order and thus, the said
Government Order has no application in respect of the sale certificates presented
by the respondents. More so, the said Government Order has already been stayed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
by this Court in W.M.P.(MD)No.7754 of 2023 in W.P.(MD)No.8431 of 2023,
dated 13.04.2023.
5.Since the respondents are ready and willing to pay applicable stamp
duty and the registration charges on the date of presentation, we are of the opinion
that the appellants have not established any ground for seeking enhanced stamp
duty as per the said Government Order. However, the Registering Authority is
empowered to demand stamp duty as per the rate prevailing on the date of
presentation of the sale certificates by the respondents for registration.
6.In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the orders of the
learned Single Judge dated 21.04.2023 stand modified to the extent that the stamp
duty and registration charges as applicable on the date of presentation of the sale
certificates by the respondents are to be recovered for the purpose of proceeding
with the registration by following the procedures as contemplated under the Act.
The respondents are at liberty to approach the appellant Registering Authority by
re-presenting the sale certificates for completion of registration in the manner
contemplated under the Act. The appellant Registering Authority is directed to
recover the stamp duty and registration charges as applicable on the date of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
original presentation of the sale certificates for registration and complete the
process of registration within a period of four (4) weeks from the date of
re-presentation of the documents by the respondents.
7.With this modification, these Writ Appeals are disposed of. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
(S.M.S., J.) & (V.L.N., J.)
29.11.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Yuva
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.
Yuva
W.A.(MD)Nos.1752 & 1767 of 2023
29.11.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
