IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12/11/2007
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.CHOCKALINGAM
W.P. No.22305 of 2006
AND
MP. Nos.1 and 2 of 2006
M.Velusamy ..Petitioner
Vs
1. The Inspector General of Registration
No.120
Santhome High Road
Santhome
Chennai 28.
2. The District Revenue Officer (Stamps)
Collectorate
Coimbatore.
3. The Joint Sub Registrar II
Tirupur.
4. The Special Tahsildar (Stamp)
Tirupur ..Respondents
Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for a writ of certiorari to
call for the records relating to the order of the first
respondent in Pa.Mu.No.27094/No.2/2005 dated 2.5.2006 and
consequential demand notice dated 18.5.2006 issued by the
fourth respondent in Mu.Pa.No.4020/The/2000 with respect to
interest portion and quash the same as illegal and
ultravires to Sec.47(A)(4) of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 as
amended by Act 1 of 2000.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan
For Respondents : Mr.S.Gopinathan, Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
Invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court, the
petitioner has sought for a writ of certiorari to quash the
order of the first respondent in Pa.Mu.No.27094/No.2/2005
dated 2.5.2006, and the consequential demand notice dated
18.5.2006, issued by the fourth respondent in
Mu.Pa.No.4020/The/2000 with respect to interest portion, as
illegal and ultravires to Sec.47(A)(4) of the Indian Stamp
Act 1899 as amended by Act 1 of 2000.
2.The affidavit in support of the petition is perused.
The Court heard the learned Counsel on either side.
3.The short facts which led the petitioner to file this
writ petition, are as follows:
He purchased a house site in Plot No.50, in Velan
Nagar, Thennampalayam Extension, comprised in Survey No.738
(corresponding T.S.No.449/3 and 449/2) and in S.F.No.740
(corresponding T.S.No.447, 448/4) in T.S.Ward No.4 (Old Ward
No.20) of Tirupur Town, for a sale consideration of
Rs.2,00,000/-. When the document was presented for
registration before the third respondent by valuing the
property at Rs.48.50 per sq. ft., the third respondent fixed
the value at Rs.645/- per sq. ft. as per the guidelines and
referred the matter to the second respondent under
Sec.47(A)(2) of the Indian Stamp Act. Therefrom, an appeal
was preferred by the petitioner before the second
respondent. The second respondent, on enquiry, re-fixed the
value at Rs.425/- per sq. ft. and directed the fourth
respondent to collect the deficit stamp duty together with
interest at the rate of 2% per month, and thereafter only,
the document could be released, pursuant to which, the
fourth respondent has also issued a notice. Under the
circumstances, this writ petition has been brought forth
before this Court.
4.The only grievance ventilated by the petitioner
before this Court, is that though he is prepared to pay the
stamp duty at the rate of Rs.425/- as fixed by the second
respondent, the direction to pay the interest at the rate of
2% from 24.2.2003, is not correct; that he is liable to make
payment of interest only from 2.5.2006 and not from
24.2.2003; that since he has got a right of appeal, as per
the available provision, he preferred an appeal, and under
the circumstances, the order has got to be quashed and
necessary directions be issued.
5.The Court heard the learned Additional Government
Pleader on the above contentions.
6.After doing so, this Court is unable to agree with
the case of the petitioner. It is not in controversy that
when the document was placed for registration before the
third respondent, the petitioner valued the property at
Rs.48.50 per sq. ft.; but, it was re-fixed by the third
respondent at Rs.645/- per sq. ft., and the matter was
referred to the second respondent under Sec.47(A)(2) of the
Indian Stamp Act. When an appeal was preferred by the
petitioner, on enquiry, it was reduced to Rs.425/- per sq.
ft. by the second respondent, and a direction was given to
the fourth respondent to collect the deficit stamp duty
along with interest at 2% on the said amount from 24.2.2003.
Now, it is pertinent to point out that the second respondent
has issued direction for the collection of the interest
amount only from 24.2.2003 and not from the date of
registration namely 19.6.2000. The contention put forth by
the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the interest has
got to be collected only from 2.5.2006 cannot be
countenanced for the simple reason that it was an appeal
preferred by the petitioner challenging that order of the
third respondent before the second respondent. Merely
because an appeal is filed, it did not mean that the
interest rate stipulated by the authority and payable by the
petitioner, would get suspended. But, in the instant case,
the second respondent has applied its mind properly and has
also directed for the collection of interest at 2% from
24.2.2003. No infirmity is noticed by this Court in
applying the provision of law as one envisaged under the
Indian Stamp Act.
7.For the reasons stated above, this writ petition
deserves an order of dismissal, and accordingly, it is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected MPs are also
dismissed.
nsv/
To:
1. The Inspector General of Registration
No.120
Santhome High Road,
Santhome
Chennai 28.
2. The District Revenue Officer (Stamps)
Collectorate
Coimbatore.
3. The Joint Sub Registrar II
Tirupur.
4. The Special Tahsildar (Stamp)
Tirupur.