NALINI Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The direction contained in Ext.P4 to pay stamp duty and penalty to the tune of Rs. 2,37,010/ - is under challenge in this writ petition. The document in question is a partition deed. The property is having an extent of 15.56 ares in R.S. No.380/12 of Block No.7 of Kakkanadu Village. The petitioner's late husband's father was the owner of the property, who had two children by name Shri Kumaran (husband of the petitioner) and Smt. Kalukurumba. Both of them are no more. The petitioner and her children, viz. Sreeja, Sreela and Sreekesh are the legal heirs of late Shri Kumaran and late Smt. Kalukurumba had one son , viz. Shri Velayudhan. The executants of the partition deed are thus the petitioner and her children through late Shri Kumaran and Shri Velayudhan through late Smt. Kalukurumba. The petitioner contends that in the light of Article 42(i) and its Explanation of the Kerala Stamp Act only Rs.1,000/ - is payable as stamp duty. After registering the document, the second respondent impounded it under Section 33 of the Act and referred the document to the first respondent for ascertaining the stamp value. Ext.P2 is the notice inviting objection to which the petitioner gave Ext.P3 explanation. The petitioner is relying upon a judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.18572/2011.

(2.) The second respondent has filed a counter affidavit. The question turns upon the interpretation of Explanation to Article 42 of the Schedule of the Stamp Act. The Explanation gives a meaning for the 'family' which reads as follows:

(3.) The respondents contend that going by the Explanation, brother and sister alone are included and legal heirs of brother and sister are not specifically mentioned in the Explanation. The deceased Kumaran and Kalukurumba are definitely brother and sister. But their legal heirs find no place in the Explanation. The learned Government Pleader submitted that the same alone can be the correct approach.