P.M. Muthish Chettiar vs Inspector General of Registration, Madras and Another

P.K. Misra, J.—Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Petitioner has prayed for quashing the order passed by the Inspector General of Registration, first respondent, calling upon the petitioner to pay

stamp duty on the market value of the property on the footing that the same shall be considered as a conveyance.

Brief narration of facts is necessary. The petitioner had purchased the disputed property under a registered sale deed dated 7-5-1967.

Subsequently a tenant was inducted. On the death of the tenant, the leasehold interest was surrendered by the widow on consideration of Rs.

20,000/- and this was purported to be a written document dated 10-7-1991. Said document was submitted for registration paying stamp duty of

Rs. 600/- apparently on the footing that Article 55 of the Indian Stamp Act was applicable. Without completing the process of registration, the

petitioner was called upon to pay stamp duty on the market value and similarly he was also called upon to pay registration fee on market value.

In the above background of facts, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in fact surrender is being in respect of lease, it is

covered under Article 61 of the Act. Wherein the maximum stamp duty payable is Rs. 40/- but more than the prescribed amount has been paid by

the petitioner on the footing that Article 55 would apply.

In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the Government it has been stated that even though Article 55 is applicable, the stamp duty payable is

on the market value and as such the first respondent was justified in calling upon the petitioner to pay higher stamp duty.

Article 55 of the Indian Stamp Act reads as follows :--

Release, that is to day, any instrument (not being such a The same duty as a Bottomery Bond

release as is provided for by Section 23-A or a release of (No. 16) for such amount or value as

benami right, whereby a person resources a claim upon set forth in the release.

another person or against any specified property.

Article 61 of the Act reads as follows :-

Surrender of lease

(a) When the duty which the lease is chargeable does not The duty with which such lease is

exceed thirty rupees; chargeable.

(b) In any other case Forty Rupees.

On a perusal of the document, there cannot be any doubt that the document purports to be surrender of lease. In fact the husband of the

executant had been inducted as a tenant and subsequently the widow has executed the deed of surrender surrendering the tenancy right and

therefore there cannot be any doubt that Article 61 was applicable. In such event maximum stamp duty payable at the relevant time was Rs. 30/-

which has been now increased to Rs. 40/-.

Even assuming that Article 55 would be applicable, still then the stamp duty paid seems to be sufficient. A perusal of Article 55 of the Indian

Stamp Act quoted above indicates that the stamp duty payable is same as a ""Bottomery Bond (No. 15) for such amount or value as set forth is the

release"" Underlined portion makes it clear that the stamp value payable is as set forth in the deed of release and not on the market value.

As distinguished from the aforesaid language used in Article 55 one can refer to Article 23, where the stamp duty payable is on the market value

of the property which is the subject-matter of the conveyance. Apart from the fact that deed of release cannot be equated with deed of

conveyance, since Article 55 itself envisages that the amount payable is for the amount set forth in the deed, there is no justification in the first

respondent to call upon the petitioner to pay the stamp duty on the market value.

Thus in either view of the matter the writ petition is bound to be allowed. Authorities, are directed to complete the process of registration as

expeditiously as possible. Preferably within a period of three months from the date of communication of the order without insisting the petitioner for

further stamp duty or registration fee.

In the result, the writ petition is allowed.