The High Court of Kerala dismissed an appeal against an order upholding that a rectification deed for a different property is a fresh conveyance liable to full stamp duty, applying the ratio of Jihas 2.
Writ appeal dismissed; no order on costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ANTONY DOMINIC &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU
WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF MARCH 2018 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1939
WA.No. 685 of 2018 IN WPC. 12354/2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 12354/2017 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 11-01-2018
APPELLANT(S)/APPELLANT
SHAINE RAVINDRANATHAN, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O. E. RAVEENDRANATHAN, R/AT ESWARA MANGALATH, KOTTAPURAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV.SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI TEK CHAND
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21-03-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JJJ
ANTONY DOMINIC, C.J. &
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
-----------------------------------------Writ Appeal No. 685 of 2018 -----------------------------------------Dated: 21st March 2018
J U D G M E N T
Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.
The appellant, Shaine Ravindranathan, purchased a flat and had it registered. Later, he realised that the property he purchased had already been conveyed to somebody else. In other words, mistakenly the owner, instead of selling one piece of property—a flat in an apartment—sold another piece. Therefore, Shaine approached the owner to have a “rectification deed”. Indeed, the owner executed Ext.P4 Rectification Deed, which Shaine presented before the respondents for registration.
stamp duty—as if it were a fresh conveyance— Shaine approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.12354 of 2017. A learned Single Judge, through judgment dated 11th January 2018, upheld the registering authority's objection: Ext.P4 amounted to a fresh conveyance. Further aggrieved, Shaine is before us.
W.A. No. 685/2018
- 2 -
property had been conveyed. He has contended that whatever stamp duty was paid had been intended to be paid for a proper conveyance. But no immovable property was actually conveyed. According to him, Ext.P4 only records and rectifies a mistake of fact, and it cannot be treated as a fresh conveyance.
2 W.A. No. 77 of 2011
W.A. No. 685/2018
- 3 -
Bench, besides setting aside the judgment in the writ petition, has observed on facts that the properties in both instances were entirely different. So it did
not treat the second deed as one of rectification.
the property sought to be conveyed through the deed of rectification is entirely a different property. Under these circumstances, we reckon that the ratio of Jihas 2 squarely applies to the facts of this case as well.
Accordingly, we dismiss the writ appeal. No order on costs.
Sd/-
ANTONY DOMINIC, CHIEF JUSTICE.
Sd/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.
jjj 21/03/2018
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a rectification deed executed for an entirely different property constitutes a fresh conveyance attracting full stamp duty.
Whether the ratio of Jihas P A v. The District Registrar applies when the property descriptions are entirely different.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jihas P A v. The District RegistrarDistinguished¶36
Jihas P A v. The District Registrar (2012 (3) KHC 146)
The District Registrar v. P.A, JihasApplied¶36
The District Registrar v. P.A, Jihas (W.A. No. 77 of 2011)
Shaine Ravindranathan
State of Kerala
Antony Dominic
Dama Seshadri Naidu
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
