MUHAMMEDALI Vs. SUB REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows:

(2.) Heard Smt. Smitha Babu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatti, learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the respondent Sub Registrar.

(3.) It is stated that for the purpose of his business, the petitioner's father, when he was alive, had availed an overdraft for an amount of Rs. 40 lakhs from the Bank of Baroda, Calicut Main Branch, after mortgaging the subject property coming to extent of 26.913 Ares, as per Ext. P-2 simple mortgage deed dated 20.08.2010. Later, the petitioner's father had died on 02.01.2011 as evident from Ext. P-1 death certificate. Subsequently, the petitioner had taken steps to close the entire loan by paying the entire due amounts and Ext. P-3 is the certificate dated 13.3.2015 issued by the Chief Manager, Bank of Baroda, Main Branch, Calicut, stating that the overdraft facility for Rs. 40 lakhs sanctioned on 30.08.2010 has been duly settled by paying full and final settlement of the outstanding dues on 13.03.2015 and that the outstanding due on the said overdraft facility account is Nil, etc. Earlier, Ext. P-2 simple mortgage deed dated 20.08.2010 was duly registered with the respondent Sub Registrar's office, Vengara and encumbrance has been noted in the registration records in respect of the said subject property. Therefore, the petitioner is now constrained to execute and register the necessary deed to evidence the discharge/cancellation of the said simple mortgage deed covered by Ext. P-2. When the petitioner had approached the office of the respondent Sub Registrar for taking steps in that regard, he was told that the same could be executed only on payment of stamp duty @ 6% of the total value and 2% of the value of the registration fee, etc. It is in the light of these factual averments that the petitioner has filed the instant Writ Petition (Civil) with the aforementioned prayers.