MALAVIKA SARUKKAI Vs. SUB-REGISTRAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard Mr.J.Balachander, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.S.R.Rajagopal, learned Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.P.P. Purushothaman, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents.

(2.) The petitioner in all the three writ petitions is one and the same. The reason for filing three writ petitions is on account of three orders being passed by the respondents, which are impugned in these three writ petitions, all pertaining to very same document namely a release deed executed in favour of the petitioner by her sister. In this common order, for the sake of convenience, the Sub-Registrar (Registrar Cadre), Saidapet, South Chennai, Chennai-15 is referred to as the first respondent and the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai-28 is referred to as the second respondent.

(3.) The question to be decided in these cases is as to whether the document presented for registration was a release deed to be charged the stamp duty at Rs.25,000/- or should it be treated as a deed of conveyance.