The High Court allowed an appeal against an order fixing additional stamp duty, holding that the Registrar's suo motu revision proceedings were void ab initio as they were initiated after the five-year limitation period mandated by the Tamil Nadu Stamp Act expired.
The Order passed by the First Respondent dated 01.03.2017 was set aside.
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.
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 11.12.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
and C.M.P.No.1851 of 2021
Tmt. T. R. K. Saraswathi ... Appellant / Applicant Vs.
Civil Miscellaneous Appeal filed under Section 47A (10) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 against the Fair and Decreetal Order dated 01.03.2017 made in K.No.40025/UI/14 on the file of the first respondent
1/7
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
herein.
For Appellant : Mr. K. R. Arun Shabari
For Respondents : Dr. S. Suriya, Additional Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed by challenging the
Order passed by the first respondent in K.No.40025/UI/14, dated 01.03.2017, wherein, directed the payment of additional stamp duty for a sum of Rs.1,44,450/-.
2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the trial Court.
3. The case of the appellant herein is that she had purchased a
vacant plot ad-measuring 16050 sq.ft of land situated in T.S.No.10/608/4B,
Krishnaroyapuram Village, Coimbatore Registration District. The appellant had purchased the above said land for value of Rs.778/- per sq.ft. Subsequently, the document was referred under Section 47(A) (1) of the
Indian Stamp Act, for valuation of stamp duty to be collected for fixation of https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/7
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
the value of land. Accordingly, the Stamp Collector has fixed the value of land at Rs.1250/- per sq.ft., by proceedings dated 15.09.2009. On 31.08.2015, the Inspector General of Registration, Chennai has initiated suo-motu proceedings under Section 47(A) (6) of the Indian Stamp Act and issued notice to the appellant herein for suo motu revision. In the revision proceedings, the appellant herein had participated and after due enquiry, the Registrar has revised the value of land at Rs.2150/-.
4. Aggrieved over the initiation of suo-motu revision, the appellant herein has approached this Court stating that there is a legal bar prescribed as per Section 47 (A) (7) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899. Hence the entire revision proceedings initiated by the first respondent is null and void.
5. Mr. K. R. Arun Shabari, learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that even though, the question of limitation was not raised before the first respondent since it is bar under the jurisdiction of the first respondent from exercising revisional power and the same is question of law and the same has been raised here and the Revisional Authority has no
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
right to exercise its jurisdiction, after lapse of limitation period.
6. Dr. S. Suriya, learned Additional Government Pleader has
submitted that purely based on good faith of the grounds, after looking every angle, the Registrar has fixed the value of property and the same is in
order and prays to confirm the Order passed by the first respondent.
Registration cum The Chief Revenue Authority and 2 Others [2017 SCC
Online Madras 24751] and 2020 SCC Madras 509, this Court has consistently held that the revisional power of the Inspector General of Registration shall be exercised within the limited period prescribed under
Section 47(A) (7) of the Tamil Nadu Stamp Act, which reads as follows:
“47 (A) (7) The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority shall not initiate proceedings against any order passed under sub-section (2) or sub-section (3) if,_
(a) the time for appeal against that order has not expired; or
4/7
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
(b) more than five years have expired after the passing of such order”.
Act, it has been proved that limitation provided under the statue has to be followed, while exercising the revisional jurisdiction and if the same is exercised after the limitation period, the entire proceedings is void ab initio . In this case, the Order of the Appellate Authority has passed on 05.09.2019 and the suo motu proceedings were initiated by the first respondent as stated in the counter is on 31.08.2015. It is admittedly supports the case of he appellant that since suo motu revision has been exercised after the lapse of limitation period prescribed under Section 47(A) (7) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, the appeal is to be allowed. Accordingly, the Order passed by the Revisional Authority is hereby liable to be set aside.
The Order passed by the First Respondent in K.No.40025/UI/14, dated 01.03.2017 is set aside. There shall be no order as to costs.
5/7
ssi Index : Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No Neutral Citation Case : Yes/No
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
11.12.2023
K.RAJASEKAR,J.,
ssi
To
5.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
6/7
C.M.A.No.275 of 2021
11.12.2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the suo motu revisional proceedings initiated by the Registration Authority after the expiration of the statutory limitation period prescribed under Section 47(A)(7) were void ab initio.
Whether the appellate authority had jurisdiction to set aside the order passed by the Revisional Authority due to the infringement of the limitation bar.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
N. Mani and Another vs. Inspector General of RegistrationReferred¶39
[2017 SCC Online Madras 24751] · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Tmt. T. R. K. Saraswathi
Inspector General of Registration
District Revenue Officer (Stamps)
District Registrar (Admn.)
Sub-Registrar
K. RAJASEKAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
