RAMASWAMY Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATIONS SANTHOME MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition has been filed for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to release the document No. 2549/1997 filed before him for registration on 25.9.1997.

(2.) IN the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition it is stated that the petitioner purchased an extent of 2410 sq.ft in Survey No. 708/1, 714/1 (Part) at Pallapatti Village, Dindigul Taluk within the registration district of Sub Registrar, Dindigul-II. The owners of the property executed the sale deed in favour of the petitioner on 25.9.1997. The sale deed was presented for registration to the third respondent and the document was given the number 2549/1997. The property was valued for the purpose of registration at Rs. 48,200/- and the stamp duty of Rs. 5,802/- was paid. The third respondent felt that the value of the agricultural land would be more. Hence he referred the matter to the Special Deputy Collector (Stamps), Madurai-20 who determined the value of the property at Rs. 1,37,370/- and by order dated 13.11.1998 he called upon the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs. 16,487/- towards stamp duty. The petitioner paid the same on 8.12.1998. Even thereafter the third respondent did not release the document.

(3.) AS seen from the counter affidavit, the reason for not returning of the document is that the Executive Officer of Soundararaja Perumal Koil has written a letter stating that the property conveyed was the property of the temple and the officer requested the respondent not to release the document. The stand taken by the first respondent is not legally sustainable.