K. MANUVEL NADAR Vs. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also Mr.R.Janakiramulu, learned Special Government Pleader, who took notice on behalf of the respondents.

(2.) THE grievance of the petitioner as found set out in the affidavit accompanying the petition as well as from the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, could pithily and succinctly be set out thus:

(3.) BEING aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the procedures adopted by the lower authority under the Indian Stamp Act, this writ petition is focused on the ground that due opportunity was not given to the petitioner to put forth his case before the third respondent, when the matter was pending before him. As such, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would pray for giving one more opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his case before the competent authority viz., the second respondent, the Special Sub -Collector (Stamps), Tuticorin so as to air his grievance and get a reasoned order from him.