S SATHYANARAYANAN Vs. DISTRICT REGISTRAR REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT TRICHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CHALLENGING the order of the District Registrar, Trichy, the first respondentherein dated 19.02.2007, the present writ petition has been filed.

(2.) IT is the case of the petitioner that properties to the extent of 1126 sq.ft in S.No.2487, Ward No.2 and 840 Sq.ft in Old T.S.No.1135, New Ward A, New Block 13, New Town Survey No.98, Trichy were purchased by the mother of the petitioner in 1985 and 1995 respectively. Thereafter, she executed a will and last testament, dated 10.06.1995 bequeathing both the properties purchased by her under two sale deeds to the petitioner and his brother Mr.Nagarajan. IT is further stated that the mother of the petitioner died on 18.08.1995, and by virtue of the will, they became the joint owners of the properties. IT is further submitted that the brother of the petitioner relinquished his half undivided right in favour of the petitioner for consideration of Rs.50,000/- and to that effect, he executed a release deed and that the same was presented for registration on 12.11.2002 before the Sub Registrar, Srirangam. However, even after the execution, the second respondent kept the document for want of clarification as to the nature of the said document and the relevant Article of the Stamp Act to be applied to the present transaction from the District Registrar, Trichy, the first respondent herein.

(3.) NOT satisfied with the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the respondents issued a show cause notice during March 2006 alleging that the documents in question has to be stamped under Article 55(C) of the Indian Stamp Act and a sum of Rs.85,137/- is deficit for the aforesaid document. Therefore, the petitioner was called upon to show cause as to why the said amount should not be imposed as stamp duty, within 15 days, failing which, penalty would be imposed. Thereafter, the petitioner submitted an explanation dated 03.07.2006 before the first respondent. Pending consideration of the explanation, the petitioner filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1084 of 2007 before this Court for a direction to release the document No.P.174/2002 forthwith on the file of the second respondent herein. When the matter came up for hearing, on instructions the learned Special Government Pleader submitted that the respondents have passed an order dated 12.02.2007 to the objections filed by the petitioner. Therefore, this Court by order dated 19.02.2007 disposed of the writ petition directing the first respondent to serve the order on the petitioner immediately. However, the petitioner received the order dated 19.02.2007 only during March 2007 wherein the petitioner was informed that by taking proceedings under Section 38 and 40 of the Indian Stamp Act, it was decided to collect a sum of Rs.73,905/- as stamp duty and imposed a sum of Rs.71,905/- as stamp duty and Rs.2,155/- as penalty, totaling a sum of Rs.74,060/- as deficit stamp duty. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ petition has been filed inter alia contending that the order of the first respondent is arbitrary, illegal and unsustainable in law. It is further contended that had the respondents conducted an enquiry before passing the impugned order, the petitioner would have produced relevant circulars and Government orders to satisfy the respondents that the document in question would fall only under Article 55(C) of the Indian Stamp Act.