JAGANATHAN C. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners agreed to purchase 3.32 Ares of property owned by one Justin Hendry comprised in Re-Survey Nos.192/6/34 and 192/6/35 in Block No.60 of Talanad (Poonjar Vadakkekara) Village. Ext.P2 sale deed in respect of that property was executed on 29/11/2021. The petitioners paid Rs.1,45,600.00 as stamp duty and Rs.36,545.00 as registration fees. According to the petitioners, though Ext.P2 document was presented for registration on 29/11/2021, registration was refused stating that the aforesaid Justin Hendry belongs to one of the Scheduled Tribes and the registration was not possible without the permission, in writing, of the District Collector under the Kerala Restriction on Transfer by and Restoration of Lands to Scheduled Tribes Act, 1999 (hereinafter referred to as the '1999 Act'). On the application made by the petitioners, the District Collector, through Ext.P6 order dtd. 3/5/2022 gave the necessary permission to purchase the land. Since Ext.P2 sale deed was not registered, on the application of the petitioners, the registration fee has already been refunded. However, their application for refund of stamp duty is pending.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the time limit mentioned in Sec. 23 of the Registration Act, 1908, cannot be a bar to registration of Ext.P2 document as the date of presentation must be taken as 29/11/2021. It is submitted that when a document is presented for registration and for some reason the registration is denied, it cannot thereafter be said that the document was not presented for registration on the date it was so presented. It is submitted that in the facts of the present case the only impediment was that the petitioners had to take permission from the District Collector under the provisions of the 1999 Act, and that permission was given by Ext.P6 order only on 3/5/2022. It is submitted that since more than four months had passed from 29/11/2021, the Sub Registrar had refused the registration of the document.

(3.) The learned Senior Government Pleader refers to the provisions of Sec. 23 of the Registration Act, 1908, and submits that the application filed by the petitioners for refund of stamp duty in respect of spoilt/used stamp papers was filed beyond time. It is submitted that the only remedy available to the petitioners in the facts and circumstances of this case is to apply for refund of stamp duty on spoilt/used stamp papers and since the petitioners had failed to make such application within time, the only remedy open to the petitioners now is to execute a fresh sale deed by paying the requisite stamp duty on the fair value now fixed in respect of the property. It is submitted that there has been a revision of fair value after 29/11/2021 and further that the registration fee payable by the petitioners had already been refunded.