SASIKUMAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners are aggrieved by the stand taken by the 3rd respondent/Sub Registrar to treat the rectification deed presented by them for registration as conveyance (sale deed), as described under Serial No.21 in the Schedule to Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 (for short 'the Stamp Act'), for the purpose of levying stamp duty.

(2.) The 1st petitioner, along with other sellers, sold a total extent of 226.88 cents of land in various survey numbers of Kannadi-1 Village in Palakkad District in favour of the 2nd petitioner and other buyers as per Ext.P1 sale deed. Subsequently, it was noticed that the boundaries of various items of properties got mixed up, and the boundaries of some of the properties were wrongly described in the sale deed. According to the petitioners, it was an error that crept in due to a clerical mistake while executing the sale deed. Therefore, the 1st petitioner, along with other sellers in the Ext.P1 sale deed, prepared Ext.P2 rectification deed in favour of the 2nd petitioner and other buyers and presented it for registration before the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent by Ext.P3 memo held that Ext.P2 should be reckoned as a sale deed and the stamp duty as per the prevalent rates should be levied on it. It is challenging Ext.P3, the petitioners have approached this Court.

(3.) I have heard Sri. Jacob Sebastian, the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader Sri. B.S. Syamanthak. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit.