IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26/11/2007
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN
Writ Petition Nos.6320 and 6321 of 1999
R.Subramani ..Petitioner in WP.6320/1999
R.S.Nagachandran ..Petitioner in WP.6321/1999
Versus
1. The District Collector / District Registrar
(Indian Stamp Act)
Sub Registrar's Office
Namagiripettai
Rasipuram.
2. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
(Registration and Stamps)
Chepauk
Chennai 5.
3. The Inspector General of Registration
Chennai 28.
4. The Tahsildar
Rasipuram. ..Respondents in both the WPs.
Prayer in W.P.No.6320 of 1999: This writ petition is
filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the records comprised in the proceeding of the
4th respondent signed on 20.03.99 and its original records
on the file of the other respondents and consequently or
subsequent proceedings, if any, and quash the same and
consequently forbear the respondent from levying any penal
charge under Section 40 the Indian Stamp Act with reference
to the sale Deed bearing temporary Registration No.913/96 on
the file of the 1st respondent.
Prayer in W.P.No.6321 of 1999: This writ petition is
filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying
for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,
calling for the records comprised in the proceeding of the
4th respondent signed on 20.03.99 and its original records
on the file of the other respondents and consequently or
subsequent proceedings, if any, and quash the same and
consequently forbear the respondent from levying any penal
charge under Section 40 the Indian Stamp Act with reference
to the sale Deed bearing temporary Registration No.912/96 on
the file of the 1st respondent.
For Petitioner : Mr.P.Mathivanan
For Respondents : Mr.V.Manoharan, Government Advocate
O R D E R
Today, when these writ petitions were taken up for
hearing, the learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf
of the respondents had submitted that the documents in
question, in the above writ petitions, have been returned to
the petitioners under the Samadan Scheme, on 26.11.2002 and
29.11.2002, after collecting the deficit stamp duty.
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has
not controverted the above said submission made on behalf of
the respondents.
3. In such circumstances, the writ petitions are
dismissed as infructuous. No costs.
csh
To
1. The District Collector/District Registrar
(Indian Stamp Act)
Sub Registrar’s Office
Namagiripettai
Rasipuram.
2. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority
(Registration and Stamps)
Chepauk
Chennai 5.
3. The Inspector General of Registration
Chennai 28.
4. The Tahsildar
Rasipuram.