RAJESH KUMAR K. T. Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P3 order and seeking a direction to the 3rd respondent to register the rectification deed similar to Ext.P2 draft rectification deed by levying stamp duty of only Rs.500.00.

(2.) Petitioner contends that the petitioner's father, late Mr.Thankappan and his sister, Thankamma had executed Ext.P1 Partition Deed No. 917/2007 of the SRO, Chirakkadavu dtd. 26/2/2007. In Ext.P1 Partition Deed, properties are divided into two schedules- 'A' and 'B'. 'A' scheduled property is divided as A1, A2 and A3 which were allotted to the father of the petitionerThankappan. 'B' scheduled property was allotted to Thankamma - sister of the petitioner's father. The details are as follows;

(3.) A detailed counter affidavit has been filed wherein the 2nd respondent has reiterated the stand taken in Ext.P3 that the document submitted for adjudication purposes by the petitioner is a fresh deed and not a correction deed. It is further contended that it is an exchange of properties between the legal heirs of late Mr. Thankappan and his sister, Mrs. Thankamma. Since the document is to be treated as a fresh sale deed, appropriate stamp duty and registration fee shall be paid as directed in Ext.P3 order. The correction deed correctly involves the transfer of property from A1 Schedule to B Schedule and the reduction and increase in properties of their respective schedules.