Madras High Court
Mr.Chirag Bansal vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer on 20 February, 2025
Author: N. Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED 20.02.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
W.P.No.10980 of 2023
Mr.Chirag Bansal ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Madhuranthagam Tax Assessment Circle,
Chennai 603 306
2. Sub Registrar,
Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Madhuranthagam,
Chennai 603 306
3. Inspector General of Registration,
100, Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar,
Mandavelipakkam,
Chennai 600 028
4. The Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited,
HIG No.42 and 43, 1st Floor,
MGR Salai, Maraimalai Nagar,
Chengalpattu – 603 209 ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to detach the said
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
property from encumbrance and also to direct the 3rd respondent to permit the
2nd respondent to register the said sale certificate in the name of the petitioner
and to forbear the respondents from in any manner dispossessing or interfering
with the petitioner's right on the said property.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.G.SAthyanarayana
For Respondents : Mrs.Amritha
Government Advocate
for 1st respondent
Mr.U.Baranidharan
Special Government Pleader
for R2 and R3
Mr.P.T.Rakesh
for R4
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for the issue of writ of Mandamus
directing the 2nd respondent to register the sale certificate issued in the name of
the petitioner and not to put against the petitioner the attachment order issued by
the 1st respondent.
2. When the matter came up for hearing on 04.02.2024, this Court
passed the following order :-
Upon Hearing both sides, the following issues arises for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
consideration before this Court and they are;
(a) the sale certificate was issued in favour of the petitioner
by the Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd., (TIIC)
dated 22.11.2021. There is no indication in the affidavit filed in
support of the writ petition as to whether the petitioner has either
sent the sale certificate to the Registrar for filing under Section 89
in Book-I or whether any steps were taken by the petitioner to
register the sale certificate. The difference between filing a sale
certificate and registration of the sale certificate and the stamp
duty involved, was discussed by this Court in detail in Sri Balaji
Fibre .Vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai and
Others reported in (2024) 4 MLJ 593. This Court must also take
into consideration the judgment of the Apex Court in The State of
Punjab and Others .Vs. Ferrous Alloy Forgings Pvt.Ltd., and
Others reported in (2024) 6 CTC 715 and ;
(b)Section 23 of the Registration Act provides for four
months time for presenting the document for registration. Section
25 of the Act provides for a further period of four months where the
document can be presented with delay and if the same is condoned,
a fine can be imposed not exceeding ten times the amount of the
registration fee. The question is as to whether this Court in exercise
of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can
condone the period of delay beyond eight months.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to
3 seeks for sometime to workout the judgments and present it
before the Court.
3.Post this writ petition under the caption 'for orders' on
17.02.2025.
3. When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the learned
counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is willing to pay the stamp
duty and the registration fees for the registration of the sale certificate.
4. On going through the materials placed before this Court, it is seen
that TIIC through communication dated 24.11.2021 had informed the Sub
Registrar about the execution of the sale certificate in favour of the petitioner
and for registration of the same. When the sale certificate was presented before
the Sub Registrar, the same was not entertained on the ground that there is an
order of attachment of the 1st respondent. Thereafter, there was no progress and
this writ petition was filed before this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. In the considered view of this Court, the 4th respondent is a secured
creditor and the property was brought for sale by the 4th respondent while
initiating proceedings for recovery of the loan amount from the borrower. Such
right of the secured creditor will have precedence over a crown debt. The law on
this issue is now too well settled.
6. In the light of the specific stand taken by the petitioner that he is
willing to pay the stamp duty and the registration fees as applicable for a sale
certificate, the relief as sought for by the petitioner can be granted by this Court.
The attachment made by the 1st respondent shall not to be put against the
petitioner for refusing to register the sale certificate.
7. In the result, there shall be a direction to the 2nd respondent to
entertain the sale certificate issued in favour of the petitioner on payment of the
necessary stamp duty and registration charges and it shall be registered and
released to the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. This writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No
costs.
20.02.2025
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking Order / Non Speaking Order
rka
To
1. Deputy Commercial Tax Officer,
Madhuranthagam Tax Assessment Circle,
Chennai 603 306
2. Sub Registrar,
Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Madhuranthagam,
Chennai 603 306
3. Inspector General of Registration,
100, Santhome High Road, Mullima Nagar,
Mandavelipakkam,
Chennai 600 028
4. The Tamil Nadu Industrial Investment Corporation Limited,
HIG No.42 and 43, 1st Floor,
MGR Salai, Maraimalai Nagar,
Chengalpattu – 603 209
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
rka
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
20.02.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
