V P SUSEELA NAIR Vs. SUB REGISTER CHERUPULACHERY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER is challenging Ext. P8 series of three demand notices issued by the 2nd respondent demanding difference in stamp duty in respect of three items of property purchased by the petitioner vide Exts. P1 to p4.

(2.) PETITIONER has produced Ext. P1 order of the District court approving sale of the entire property that was purchased by the petitioner at the declared price as the sale was on behalf of the minor which required clearance from the court. It is seen from Ext. P1 order of the District court that simultaneously the guardian of the minor re-invested the sale proceeds in the purchase of another item of property which is also approved by the court by the very same order. Counsel for petitioner contended that when the market value of the property sold by the seller is approved by the District court, though not under the Stamp Act, the same will bind the 2nd respondent.

(3.) EVEN in the counter affidavit, there is no case for the 2nd respondent that before issuing the adjudication orders the 2nd respondent has given a hearing to the petitioner. It is also pertinent to note that the impugned orders are issued in the standard form by filling up the blanks. These orders obviously are not adjudication orders because an adjudication involves objective consideration of the issue adjudicated, with reference to the objections raised by the affected parties. Before issuing the final adjudication order, it is mandatory for the Registrar to conduct enquiry, communicate to the petitioner the basis on which he proposes to demand differential stamp duty, given opportunity to file objections and to produce documents in support thereof and thereafter adjudication order should be issued based on evidence and after considering the objections raised and after hearing the petitioner. Exhibit P8 series of adjudication orders issued in the prescribed Format are therefore liable to be interfered with on this sole ground. The O. P. is therefore allowed setting aside Exts. P8 series, with direction to the 2nd respondent-District Registrar to issue fresh notice to the petitioner conveying the grounds on which the 2nd respondent proposes to demand additional stamp duty and given an opportunity to the petitioner to file objections. Petitioner is free to rely on Ext. P1 and the documents produced in this court and any other evidence petitioner wants to rely on. The 2nd respondent is directed to pass fresh adjudication orders within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. No costs.