Disposed

A.Stanislaus v. the Special Deputy Collector(Stamp)

Madras HC28 Feb 2020WP(MD)/3749/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court disposed of a writ petition seeking a mandamus to direct the Special Deputy Collector (Stamp) to complete stamp duty proceedings under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act regarding a specific sale deed within eight weeks without adjudicating on the merits of the under valuation claim.

What did the court decide?

Direction to complete stamp duty proceedings under Section 47(A) of Indian Stamp Act and pass orders on merits within eight weeks.

A.Stanislaus Vs the Special Deputy Collector(Stamp) — Madras HC (2020) — LawSathi Research

¶1

W.P.(MD)No.3749 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 28.02.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR W.P.(MD)No.3749 of 2020

¶3

A.Stainslaus : Petitioner

¶4

vs.

¶5

1.The Special Deputy Collector (Stamp), Collectorate, Madurai.

¶6

2.The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶7

3.The Joint Sub-Registrar No.II, Office of Sub Registrar, Dindigul Collector Office Campus, Dindigul.

¶8

4.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Dindigul Collector Office Campus, Dindigul District. : Respondents

¶9

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the first respondent to complete the proceedings initiated by him under Section 47(A) of Indian Stamp Act in S.R.No.429/2019 DGL-II, dated 12.09.2019 in respect of the sale deed in document No.4599/2019, dated 22.08.2019 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lenin Kumar

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This Writ Petition is filed to direct the first respondent to complete the proceedings initiated by him under Section 47(A) of Indian Stamp Act in S.R.No.429/2019 DGL-II, dated 12.09.2019 in respect of the sale deed in document No.4599/2019, dated 22.08.2019 within a stipulated time that may be fixed by this Court.

¶13

2.The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a Director of the Society, which has purchased a property and presented the sale deed for registration. Though the third respondent registered the document, he referred the document for under valuation by treating the document, where property had been under valued.

¶14

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

¶15

1/2

¶16

W.P.(MD)No.3749 of 2020

¶17

3.Having regard to the limited scope of prayer in the Writ Petition, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's case, this Court is inclined to pass the following direction:-

¶18

4.The first respondent is directed to complete the proceedings initiated under Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act in relation to the document, dated 22.08.2019 and registered as a document No.4599/2019 and pass appropriate orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶19

5.Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶20

Assistant Registrar (records)

¶21

// True Copy //

¶22

/ /2020 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS )

¶23

Cmr

¶24

¶25

1.The Special Deputy Collector (Stamp), Collectorate, Madurai.

¶26

2.The Tahsildar, Dindigul West Taluk, Dindigul District.

¶27

3.The Joint Sub-Registrar No.II, Office of Sub Registrar, Dindigul Collector Office Campus, Dindigul.

¶28

4.The District Registrar, Registration Department, Dindigul Collector Office Campus, Dindigul District.

¶29

+1 CC to Mr.T.LENINKUMAR, Advocate ( SR-9238[F] dated 28/02/2020 ) +1 CC to SPL GP ( SR-9536[F] dated 02/03/2020 )

¶30

W.P.(MD)No.3749 of 2020 28.02.2020

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ MK (12.03.2020) 2P 7C

¶32

2/2

A.Stanislaus v. the Special Deputy Collector(Stamp)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Stanislaus v. the Special Deputy Collector(Stamp)

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

Manikavel Vs the District Revenue Officer

K.Muniasamy Vs the District Collector

Shanthi, W/O Sekar, Vs the District Collector

Marimuthu Vs the Tahsildar

K. Sakthivel Vs The District Collector

Reghunathan Vs the Sub Collector