Madras High Court
The Chief Controlling Revenue ... vs P.Loganathan on 30 October, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.10.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
and
C.M.P. Nos.13018, 24307 and 24311 of 2025
1.The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority,
Inspector General of Registration,
Chennai-600 028.
2.The District Registrar,
District Registration Officer,
Coonoor Road, Udhagamandalam-643 001.
3.The Joint Sub-Registrar-1,
Udhagamandalam-643 001. ... Appellants in both appeals
Vs.
1.P.Loganathan ... Respondent in W.A.No.1717 of 2025
2.P.Sridhar ... Respondent in W.A.No.3009 of 2025
Prayer in W.A.No.1717 of 2025: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of
Letters patent praying to set aside the order dated 20.06.2024 made in
W.P.No.28857 of 2022 and allow the writ appeal.
Prayer in W.A.No.3009 of 2025: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of
Letters patent praying to set aside the order dated 20.06.2024 made in
W.P.No.28856 of 2022 and allow the writ appeal.
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
For Appellant(s) : Mr.U.Baranidharan
in both appeals Special Government Pleader
For Respondent(s) : Mr.C.S.K.Sathish
in both appeals
COMMON JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Under assail is a common writ order dated 20.06.2024 in W.P.
Nos.28856 and 28857 of 2022. Release deed was presented for
registration under Registration Act. Document was impounded under
Section 33 of the Act, mainly on the ground that stamp duty must be
paid under Article 55(D)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. However, the
presentant of the document raised an objection that it is a release deed
and therefore stamp duty is to be charged under Article 55A of Indian
Stamp Act, 1899. The District Registrar adjudicated the issue and
arrived at a conclusion that it is a release deed is between partners in a
partnership firm and therefore stamp duty is to be charged under Article
55(D)(i) of Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
2. Review was preferred before Reviewing Authority/Inspector
General of Registration. Inspector General of Registration
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
independently considered the nature of instrument and affirmed the
decision taken by District Registrar that the release deed is to be
charged under Article 55(D)(i) of Schedule I to Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
3. The Learned Government Pleader would submit that issue
pertaining to charging provision was confirmed by the writ court. Writ
court also affirmed the decision of District Registrar confirmed by the
Inspector General of Registration that release deed presented by the
presentant is to be stamped under Article 55(D)(i), Schedule I of Indian
Stamp Act, 1899. While confirming the decision of original authority and
reviewing authority, writ court further issued direction to the registering
authority to send the documents to Collector concerned under Section
47-A of Indian Stamp Act, 1899, for determination of market value of
Schedule property in the instrument.
4. The learned Government Pleader confined his arguments, that
writ Court expanded the scope of writ petition by issuing a direction to
registering authority to refer the document under Section 47-A of Indian
Stamp Act, 1899, to District Collector. It is contended that such a
reference is unnecessary and not an issue involved in the writ petition.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
That apart, document is yet to be registered and therefore to that extent
the writ order has to be modified.
5. Mr.C.S.K.Sathish, learned counsel appearing on behalf of
respondent, would oppose by stating that District Collector has recorded
market value of Schedule property. Writ court has raised an issue
regarding market value determined by registering authority in respect of
subject properties, while computing stamp duty payable on documents.
When an issue had been raised by writ court and answered that the
document is to be referred under Section 47-A of Indian Stamp Act,
1899, there is no reason for the State to prefer an appeal. Thus, present
appeal is to be rejected.
6. This Court has considered the rival submissions made between
the parties to the lis.
7. It is not in dispute that release deed was presented for
registration. While scrutinising document, registering authority found that
Stamp Duty has been paid under a wrong provision of Indian Stamp Act,
1899. Registering authority formed an opinion that release deed was
executed between partners in a partnership firm and therefore Stamp
Duty is to be charged under Article 55(D)(i), Schedule I to the Indian
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
Stamp Act, 1899. Thus, he refused to register the document.
Presentant of the document preferred a petition before District Registrar,
who in turn affirmed by stating that Stamp Duty is to be charged under
Article 55(D)(i), Schedule I to Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Revision before
Inspector General has failed. Thus, writ petition came to be instituted.
8. In impugned order, document presented for registration was
impounded under Section 33 of the Act, on the ground whether stamp duty for
subject instrument is to be charged under Article 55A or under Article 55(D)(i),
Schedule I to Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Said issue alone had been adjudicated
and decided by District Registrar and by review authority / Inspector General
of Registration. Thus, any further direction by writ Court to refer subject
document under Section 47A of Indian Stamp Act to Collector is unwarranted.
Admittedly, subject document is yet to be registered. Question of referring
document may or may not arise and decision to be taken by Registering
Authority at the time of registering document. Registering Authority is bound to
follow procedures contemplated under Registration Act and Rules framed
thereunder by conducting inspection and scrutinizing document. Therefore,
direction issued by writ Court to appellants herein to refer subject document to
Collector under Section 47A of Indian Stamp Act alone is set aside.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
9. Accordingly, impugned common writ order dated 20.06.2024 in
W.P.Nos.28856 and 28857 of 2022 stands modified to an extent of setting
aside direction issued to refer document to Collector under Section 47A of
Indian Stamp Act, 1899. As far as order of Inspector General of Registration
confirming order of District Registrar are concerned, same are affirmed.
Consequently, the Writ Appeals stand allowed in part. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [M.S.Q., J.]
30.10.2025
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/ No
mka
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
To:
1.The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority,
Inspector General of Registration,
Chennai-600 028.
2.The District Registrar,
District Registration Officer,
Coonoor Road, Udhagamandalam-643 001.
3.The Joint Sub-Registrar-1,
Udhagamandalam-643 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J.
mka
W.A. Nos.1717 and 3009 of 2025
30.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 01:55:03 pm )
