S. Geetha Ranjani vs The District Registrar

M. Venugopal, J.—Heard Mr.C.B. Muralikrishnan, the Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner and Mr.K.Guru, the Learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the Respondents.

According to the Petitioner, she is the absolute owner of the property- Iyan Punjai in S.No. 147/1B1, measuring to an extent of 2.88 acres in Madakudi Village, Lalgudi Division, Registration District of Ariyalur and Revenue District of Trichy was owned and possessed by one A.Mahalingam, Son of Arumugam, vide sale deed, dated 29.4.2013 from one N.V. Rangaraju under Doc.No. 2545/2013, Su-Registrar Office, Lalgudi. After the said purchase, the Vendor has transferred the revenue records such as Patta, Chitta and Adalgal etc. The said Vendor has agreed to sell the lands measuring to an extent of 1. 33 acres in S.No. 147/1B1 out of the total extent of 2.88 acres on the middle of the land on the east west direction of larger extent to the Petitioner for valuable consideration of Rs.10,50,250/-.Added further, once the document is registered, there is no power for the detention of the document unless Section 47-A of the Indian Stamps Act comes into operative plea.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner represents before this Court that the Registering Authority/Second Respondent has not followed the procedure envisaged under the law and further the Second Respondent has unnecessarily keeping the document of the Petitioner without returning the same, despite the Registration of the document was already over.

At this stage, this Court aptly points out the decision in the The Sub Registrar, Registration Department and Others Vs. R. Rama and The Tamil Nadu Small Industries Development Corporation Ltd., , whereby and where under, it is observed as under:-

"If a authority registering such document has a reason to believe that market value of the property has not been truly set forth, he may after registering such document refer the same to the Collector ? Such registering authority is not vested with the power to demand payment of additional duty nor he has got any power to postpone the registration of the document ? His only authority / power is to make an endorsement on such registered document regarding valuation, refer the matter to the Collector for determination of proper stamp duty payable thereon and return the document to the person entitled to receive such document.

In the present case the registering authority has not followed the aforesaid procedure, which has been judicially recognized in a long series of decisions, and unnecessarily kept the document with himself without return the same to the writ petitioner.

Direction issued to the Registering Authority to return the document to the first respondent and if the authority has any reason to believe that the market value has not been properly reflected, it would be open for him to take action in accordance with law as contemplated under Section 47-A."

That apart, this Court aptly points out the decision of this Court in B. Rajappa and Another Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) The Office of the Collectorate (V Floor), Mr. Singaravelar Maligai Rajaji Salai, Madras-1 and Others , at Special Page, 550, whereby and where under in paragraphs 13 to 16 it is observed as under:-

"13. In the light of the said provisions, the learned Advocate General had to necessarily admit that the respondents have no authority or jurisdiction to retain the documents once it has been registered. Even assuming that there is scope for reference in respect of alleged under- valuation, the registering authority has no authority to retain the documents and this is also clear from the provisions of Sections 52, 59 and 60 of The Indian Registration Act.

In the circumstances, while following the above pronouncements, these two writ petitions are allowed. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the Registering Authority, namely, the 2nd respondent in W.P. No. 22998 of 2001 and the sole respondent in W.P. No. 8637 of 2002, to return the original sale deed as registered with necessary endorsements within ten days from the date of communication of this order or a production of a copy of the same by the respective petitioner.

While appreciating the anxiety expressed on behalf of the State by the learned Advocate General, this Court directs that :-

"i) It is open to the Registering Authority to affix a seal, while releasing the original deed or conveyance or any other document indicating that a reference is pending under Section 47-A with respect to under- valuation and assessment of Stamp Duty payable, as and when the proceedings reach finality, the same shall be intimated to the person who is liable to pay stamp duty demanding payment of deficit Stamp Duty payable on the instrument.

ii) The Registrar to make corresponding entries under Sections 54, 55 of The Registration Act, 1908, in the Register of indexes as to pendency of proceedings under Section 47-A.

iii) On completion of adjudication as to the under-valuation by the competent authority as well as appeal or revision, if any, thereof, and depending upon the ultimate decision, the said authorities to recover deficit stamp duty according to law.

iv) Till such proceeding reaches finality and deficit is paid, there will be a charge for the deficit stamp duty, which is the subject matter of transfer or conveyance.

v) On payment of deficit stamp duty, if any payable, the Registrar may once again, on production of the original deed of transfer, make appropriate entry and recording the additional stamp duty paid and release of charge and also make consequential entries in the registers/ indexes maintained under Sections 54, 55, etc., of The Registration Act."

Before parting with the case, with heavy heart, this Court has to point out that neither the State Government nor the Chief Controlling Authority had intimated about the law laid down by the Division Bench of this Court and the Registrars have been flouting the dicta laid down by this Court with impunity. Such violations are per se contemptuous. This Court pointed out this to the learned Advocate General, who in turn relied upon certain circulars issued, but they are not towards compliance with pronouncements and in conformity with the judgment of the Division Bench. However, this Court takes a lenient view in this respect, in view of the fair stand taken and explanation offered by the learned Advocate General."

Apart from the above, this Court in the interest of justice refers to the order, dated 02.06.2014 in W.P. No. 11013 of 2014 between J.Jayakrishnan v. The State of Tamil Nadu, whereby and where under, in paragraph 4, this Court has observed and laid down as follows:-

"4. It is settled proposition of law that once a document is registered, the registering authority has no power to withhold the same. This was the view taken by this Court in B. Rajappa and Another Vs. The Special Deputy Collector (Stamps) The Office of the Collectorate (V Floor), Mr. Singaravelar Maligai Rajaji Salai, Madras-1 and Others , Therefore, following the decision of this Court mentioned supra, the following direction is issued in this writ petition:-

(i) The Registering Authority/fourth respondent is directed to release the sale deed dated 15.02.2013 to the petitioner forthwith. While releasing the sale deed dated 15.02.2013 to the petitioner, the respondent shall make necessary endorsement on the original document to the effect that the proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act are pending.

(ii) The Registering Authority/fourth respondent shall make necessary entries in the register maintained regarding the pendency of 47-A proceedings in respect of the document, which is the subject matter of registration, so as to reflect the same in the encumbrance certificate for the benefit of the purchasers.

(iii) Pending final decision, in respect of the valuation under Section 47-A(i), as per Section 47-A(4), there shall be a charge over the properties in favour of the Government in respect of the unpaid value of the stamp duty.

(iv) After the entire proceedings under Section 47-A are completed, the registering authority shall make necessary endorsement removing the earlier endorsement clearly stating that the entire amount of stamp duty under the document has been paid in full and return the same.

(v) After making such endorsement, the Registering Authority/fourth respondent shall also make necessary entry as to the completion of 47-A proceedings in the register maintained by them so as to reflect the same in the encumbrance certificate.

It is open to the fourth respondent to finalise the proceedings initiated under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law. "

Furthermore, in Tata Coffee Limited and K. Manohar Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others, wherein,it is held that ?Authority contemplated to conduct enquiry under Section 47(A) for finding out the market price is not fettered with such Guidelines Register, since the enquiry contemplate of the Collector, is independent. Also in the aforesaid decision, it is observed and held as follows:

If the registering authority still has reason to believe that the market value has not been truly set forth in the instrument, he has right to refer the instrument to the Collector under Section 47-A(1) of the Act, for determination of market value for the purpose of ascertaining the proper duty under the document ? It is incumbent on the part of the registering authority to give his reasons to arrive at such conclusion.

This procedure of conducting enquiry by the Collector as per the above said Rules is made applicable in respect of the powers of the Collector to conduct suo motu enquiry under Section 47A(3) of the Act.?

Continuing further, in A.J. Mapillai Mohadeen Vs. Sub-Registrar, Registration Department and Others, wherein, it is held that ?Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 can be pressed into service only when Registering Officer has reason to believe that market value of property which is subject matter of conveyance has not been truly set forth and it is so done with the intent to fraudulently evade payment of proper stamp duty etc.?

On a careful consideration of the contentions advanced on behalf of the Petitioner and in view of the fact that the Petitioner had averred in the present Writ Petition that the Second Respondent had not returned the original sale Deed after completing the Registration formalities on 14.03.2014, this Court pertinently opines at this stage that once the document is registered, the Registering Authority has no power to withheld the same. As such, this Court in furtherance of substantial cause of justice and to prevent aberration of justice, directs the second respondent/ the Sub- Registrar, Office of the Sub Registrar, Lalgudi, to release the Sale Deed, dated 14.03.2014, to the Petitioner forthwith.

(i) At the time of releasing the Sale Deed, dated 14.03.2014, to the Petitioner, the 2nd Respondent is directed to make necessary endorsement on the original documents in question to the effect that the proceedings under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamps Act, 1899 are contemplated or pending, as the case may be.

(ii) It is open to the Registering Authority/second Respondent to make relevant entries in the Register maintained in regard to the pendency of Section 47-A proceedings in respect of Sale Deed in question, which is subject-matter of Registration, with a view to reflect the same in the Encumbrance Certificate, for the benefit of the Purchasers.

(iii) Pending final decision, in respect of any valuation under Section 47(A)(i), as per Section 45(A) of the Indian Stamps Act, 1899, there shall be a charge over of the properties in favour of the Government in respect of the unpaid value of the Stamp Duty, if any.

(iv) Also that, after completion of whole proceedings under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamps Act, the Registering Authority / the 2nd Respondent is to make necessary endorsement annulling / superseding the earlier endorsement by clearly mentioning that the full / entire sum of Stamp Duty under the Document was paid in full and return the same.

(v) Moreover, after making such endorsement, the 2nd Respondent / Registering Authority shall also make entries in regard to the completion of Section 47(A) proceedings in the Register maintained by them with a view to reflect the same in the Encumbrance Certificate.

(vi) In any event, the second Respondent is at liberty to finalise / complete the proceedings initiated under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamps Act, as quickly as possible, of course, in the manner known to law and in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.