N DHANAKOTI Vs. SPECIAL DEPUTY TAHSILDAR TIRUCHENGODE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The above mentioned three writ petitions shall be disposed of by this order. Though the details of facts differ in each petition, the sub-stratum of the challenge is identical in all the three cases.

(2.) All the three petitioners are vendees and they purchased some immovable property in Palghat District, Kerala. Along with that, they also purchased some immovable property situated in the State of Tamil Nadu. Needless to mention that the Sub-Registrar who registered the sale deed was the same, i.e. at vadakancherry in Kerala State. The other property was in Salem District, Tamil Nadu and the Sub-Registrar Komarapalayam would have been the proper Sub Registrar for effecting this transaction, but probably since the Kerala rates of registration as lower than that of Tamil Nadu, the petitioners chose to get their properties registered in Kerala State. There is no dispute that the properties were registered there. In all the three petitions, the petitioners challenge the orders passed against them, by which the petitioners have been directed to pay certain sums on account of the non payment of proper registration fees. In all the three petitions, the challenged orders are in the nature of a final notice directing the petitioners to pay certain amounts on account of their not having paid proper registration charges. Admittedly, the action appears to be under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). These notices have been challenged on various grounds.

(3.) The learned couraiel for the petitioners points out that though this is a notice, it is obvious that some orders came to be passed earlier, initiating.the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act and thereafter, in those proceedings, the concerned officers came to the conclusion behind the back of the petitioners that the proper registration charges were not paid. The learned counsels main ground is that it is only this final notice that has been sent to the petitioners in all the three cases and they have been kept in dark in respect of the earlier notices and thus, the final intimations which have been sent and which are in challenge in the three petitions are null and void since the petitioners, have never been heard at all.