Transaction value fixed under decree of Court is to be accepted by Registering Authority for determining stamp duty.

This application has been filed by the Sub Registrar of Adyar contending as follows:

(i) The applicant is a third party and not a party in the Civil Suit which ended in compromise. As per the Memorandum of Compromise Decree ordered by this Court on 22.3.2005 in Kottivakkarn Revenue Village comprised in S. Nos. 281/2,4 and 6, 1 acre 93 cents in para 12 of the order it is stated that "Sale consideration at the rate of Rs. 72, 00, 000/- per acre which in the circumstances of the case is fair consideration taking into account" and in para 19 of the order "Sub-Registrar of Adyar, shall obey the order and register the Sale deed executed by the parties and presented on 14.6.2005.

(ii) The value fixed per acre by this Court comes to about Rs. 72 lakhs for which only the parties have paid the stamp duty. But the present value of the suit property will be 10 times than the value made in the compromise decree. Hence it is very essential to verify as to whether the fair consideration value has to be taken into consideration or whether the value as fixed by this Court in the compromise decree has to be accepted while calculating the stamp duty.

(iii) The sale consideration value does not reflect the prevailing market value and if it is not clarified the same may result in loss of revenue to the Government. The details of the value are given below: -

(iv) The applicant prays this Court to clarify the portion of the order in respect of paragraph 12 relating to sale consideration per acre for the suit property governed by the compromise decree.

2. The Proprietor of the 13th and 14th respondent and 12th and 13th defendant in the suit has filed a counter Affidavit, wherein he has contended as follows:

(i) It is false that the value of the property will be 10 times than the value made in the compromise decree. The plaintiff-Bank filed the suit against the defendants for recovery of a sum of Rs. 37,60,608/-. The claim of the plaintiff-Bank was that the properties of the defendants were given as collateral security. The sixth defendant Ayesha Haque and the seventh defendant S.A. Hakim were the owners of the properties situate at Kottivakkam Village comprised in S.Nos. 281/2 and 281/6 measuring about 2.53 acres and S.Nos. 281/2 and 281/6 measuring about 1.93 acres altogether measuring about 4.46 acres., However, since Ayesha Haquewas in the United States of America, she came to know about the Bank's suit only in December 1995 and also came to know that the suit ended in compromise dated 28.4.1995. As per the decree on 11.9.1995 the Bank received a sum of Rs.90,00,000/- from the 13th defendant and entered full satisfaction in the suit. Hence the sixth defendant filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree and other application for interim injunction etc., against the plaintiff and the 13th defendant and others. By order dated 30.7.1997 the compromise decree was set aside as it will not bind the 6th defendant and it was open to her to deal with her share of the property. The plaintiff-Bank filed OSA Nos. 205 to 224 of 2000 and on 18.8.2000 the order setting aside the compromise decree was stayed. Thus, raced with bitter litigation from 1996, the parties after discussions decided to compromise the matter once and for all. In the year 1995 the entire property was valued at Rs.90,00,000/- and the 13th defendant paid the sum of Rs.90 lakhs to the Bank pursuant to the earlier Compromise Decree dated 28.4.1995.

(ii) Taking into consideration the plethora of applications and the bitter litigation, the plaintiff entered into a compromise memo with the sixth defendant and other defendants. The plaintiff being a Nationalised Bank no charge of fraud can be made against them in respect of valuation of the property. There was no willful under valuation of subject of transfer with fraudulent intent to evade payment of proper stamp duty.

(iii) There is no jurisdiction vested in the Registering Authorities to invoke Section 47-A of the Stamp Act. Ther