LAKSHMI Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether the stamp duty payable in respect of a "Gift Deed' executed by a person in favour of the grandson of her deceased son, is at the lesser rate of Rupees two for every rupees 100 as stipulated under Schedule, Sl. No. 51 of Stamp Act. '2%' for every Rs. 100/- as stipulated under Schedule Sl. No. 51(a)(i) of the Kerala Stamp Act (as amended), treating the beneficiary as a member of the 'Family' of the executant or whether at the higher rate of Rupees five for every rupees 100 as stipulated under Schedule, Sl. No. 51 of Stamp Act. '5%' for every Rs. 100/- as stipulated under Schedule Sl. No. 51 (a)(ii) of the said Act, is the issue involved.

(2.) The petitioner was the owner of 2.024 Ares of land comprised in re-survey No. 170/1A, 6A (old Sy.No. 93/1), having obtained the title by virtue of the assignment deed bearing No. 1018/1978 as mentioned in para. 1 of the Writ Petition. The petitioner wanted to convey the property by way of two separate conveyances, in respect of the two different portions, the first one in favour of her son and other one in favour of the grandson of her deceased son. The property sought to be conveyed in favour of the son was registered by the concerned Sub Registry as borne by Exhibit P1 Gift Deed bearing No. 1664/2010, whereas registration of the Gift Deed/Settlement Deed sought to be executed by the petitioner in favour of the grand-son of her deceased son, paying the stamp duty at similar lesser rate under Schedule Sl. No. 51(a)(i) of the Kerala Stamp Act, (treating the beneficiary as a member of the family) was, however, not acceded to by the Sub Registry. The document was impounded by the second respondent under Section 33 of the Act and the same was forwarded to the first respondent for further steps. The first respondent issued a notice to the petitioner demanding a sum of Rs. 26,550/-(including the deficit stamp duty and penalty as prescribed) as borne by Exhibit P3. The petitioner submitted Exhibit P4 explanation. But, since no favourable orders were passed, W.P.(C).No. 38651 of 2010 was filed, which culminated in Exhibit P5 judgment, whereby the first respondent was directed to finalise the proceedings after considering the objections preferred by the petitioner. Pursuant to Exhibit P5 judgment, the petitioner supplemented the objections already filed, by submitting Exhibit P6. After considering the case projected by the petitioner, the first respondent finalised the matter by passing Exhibit P7 order dated 21.2.2011, whereby the earlier proposal was confirmed and the amount stated as due was demanded, which, in turn is under challenge in this Writ Petition.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents at length.