Disposed

Mr.G.Kishore Kumar v. The District Revenue Officer

Madras HC1 Dec 2015WP/35449/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition, the petitioner challenged the detention of a registered sale deed. The court held that while valuation is permissible, withholding the document is unlawful. The respondent was directed to return the deed within four weeks and complete valuation within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Return of sale deed No.17984/2014 to petitioner within four weeks; valuation process to complete within eight weeks.

Mr.G.Kishore Kumar Vs The District Revenue Officer — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 01.12.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

W.P.No.35449 of 2015

G.Kishore Kumar

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Revenue Officer (Stamps), Collectorate Office, 5^th Floor, No.52, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001, 1. The Sub Registrar, Tiruporur. ... Respondents

¶10

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for records pertaining to proceedings No.577/2015 dated 11.09.2015 on the file of the 2^nd respondent and quash the same as illegal and unlawful and further direct the 2^nd respondent to release the sale deed dated 24.11.2014 registered as document No.17984/2014.

¶11

The petitioner presented a sale deed dated 24.11.2014 for purchase of a property of an extent of 1.97 acres in S.No.108/6 in No.38, Mattukadu village, Kanchipuram under for registration. It was registered as document No.17984 of 2014. After due registration, as the document was not returned to the petitioner, the petitioner made a request. By the impugned proceedings No.577/2015 dated 11.09.2015, it was rejected by the 2^nd respondent. Challenging the said proceedings dated 19.11.2015, the petitioner has come before this Court with the present writ petition.

¶12

On instructions, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents submitted that the document is pending with the District Revenue Officer (Stamps) for assessing the correct value of the registration fee and stamp fee, as the document is under-valued and that is the reason it has not been given.

¶13

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

Determining the valuation is one thing and withholding the document is another thing. While there is no bar for the respondents to proceed to fix the correct valuation and thereafter make demand as per law, the same cannot be a ground to withhold the document after due registration, as held by catena of decisions of this Court.

¶15

Therefore, the respondents are hereby directed to return the sale deed dated 24.11.2014 registered in document No.17984 of 2014 to the petitioner with an endorsement that it is being done so, subject to the pending proceedings for undervaluation apart from imposing any other condition if required. The said document will have to be returned to the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondents shall complete the process of determining the valuation within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶16

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(J)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
usk
To
1. The District Revenue Officer (Stamps),
Collectorate Office, 5 th Floor,
No.52, Rajaji Salai, Chennai – 600 001,
2. The Sub Registrar,
Tiruporur.
+ 1 cc to Mr.S. Sethuraman, Advocate SR.65564
W.P.No.35449 of 2015
VS(CO)
Eu 15.12.15

¶17

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Mr.G.Kishore Kumar v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr.G.Kishore Kumar v. The District Revenue Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G.Vasudevan, Vs The Regional Passport Officer

Latha W/o.Velu & Velmurugan Vs Union of India rep. by

R.Palanisami Vs The District Collector

Sundaram Vs The Additional Chief Secretary

S.K.Sivarajan Vs The District Collector

K.Balu, Vs The Superintendent of Police