Sithick Jalaludeen v. The Sub Registrar

Madras HC7 Feb 2025WP(MD)/30030/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition (Article 226, Certiorarified Mandamus) before Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Justice V. Lakshminarayanan; petitioner Sithick Jalaludeen v. Sub Registrar, Kalayarkoil, Sivagangai District; impugned order dated 02.12.2024; Document No.5233 of 2024 dated 25.09.2024; compliance with earlier order dated 07.02.2025; document returned; excess stamp duty and registration fee refund left to statutory proceedings; petition disposed without further orders.

What did the court decide?

Return of the document was achieved through compliance with the Court's order dated 07.02.2025, as recorded; refund of excess stamp duty was left to the petitioner to pursue through appropriate proceedings under law; no further orders were passed. ¶¶17

Sithick Jalaludeen Vs The Sub Registrar — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Special Original Jurisdiction

¶2

Friday, the Fourteenth day of March Two Thousand and Twenty Five

¶3

PRESENT

¶4

The HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶5

WP(MD). No.30030 of 2024

¶6

Sithick Jalaludeen

¶7

Vs The Sub Registrar, O/o. Sub Registrar, Kalayarkoil, Sivagangai District.

¶8

Prayer :-

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned order passed by the respondent dated 02.12.2024 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondent to return the document in Document No.5233 of 2024 dated 25.09.2024 on the file of respondent within the time stipulated by this Honble Court and direct the respondent to refund the excess stamp duty and registration fee collected from the petitioner immediately.

¶10

ORDER:- This Writ Petition coming on this day under the caption “ For Reporting

¶11

Compliance” and upon perusing the earlier order of this Court dated 07.02.2025 and

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

1/3

¶14

upon hearing the arguments of Mr.T.Antony Arulraj, Advocate for the Petitioner and of Mr.Veerakathiravan, Additional Advocate General, assisted by Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam, Government Advocate for the respondent, this Court made the following order:

¶15

Both sides state that the order, dated 07.02.2025, has been complied with and the document has been received.

¶16