1. This Writ Petition is filed by the Petitioner to quash the letter of the 1st Respondent dated 212. 2008, whereby it has been stated that the Sale Certificate issued in favour of the Petitioner was chargeable with 8% stamp duty on the market value of the property under Article 23 of the Schedule-I of the Indian Stamp Act since the same has not been issued by Civil/Revenue Court or Collector or Revenue Officer and consequently, to direct the 3rd Respondent to release the said Sale Certificate after refunding a sum of Rs.1,64,895/- to the Petitioner.

2. The case of the Petitioner is that the Petitioner concerned has purchased the property in the auction held by the Authorised Officer of Indian Overseas Bank under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (for short’ SARFAESI Act) and in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 13 read with Rule 12 of the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002, brought the properties mortgaged to secure the debt due to the Jawahar Mills Limited for sale, on 02.05.2005. One V.S. Murugan, Proprietor of M/s. Hari Tex, 63 Patel Road, Coimbatore, submitted a tender for purchasing the property at the rate of Rs.7,00,70,007/- with a deposit of a sum of Rs.70,00,007/- and the tender was accepted by the Authorised Officer. Subsequently, since the tenderer failed to deposit the balance amount of Rs.6,30,63,000/- within the time stipulated in the tender notice, the Authorised Officer, by a letter dated 23.08.2005 cancelled the acceptance of the tender; challenging the same, the said V.S. Murugan filed W.P. No.37139 of 2005 before this Court against the Indian Overseas Bank, through its Regional Manager, Salem and the Authorised Officer of Indian Overseas Bank, Salem as well as the Jawahar Mills. At the time of hearing of the Writ Petition, the tenderer offered to pay the balance amount of Rs.6,30,63,000/- along with interest at the rate of 19.5% per annum from 13.05.2005 till the date of final payment and accepting the proposal, this Court passed an order directing the tenderer to deposit the said balance sale price along with interest. The total amount payable works out to Rs.8 crores and odd. As per the order of this Court passed in W.P. No.37139 of 2005, the Authorized Officer has to issue the Sale Certificate either in favour of original tenderer, viz., V.S. Murugan or his nominee.

3. It is further stated that the Petitioner, as a nominee of V.S. Murugan, deposited a sum of Rs.1,64,79,393/- to the Authorized Officer towards the value of the properties described in Schedule ‘B’ in the Sale Certificate. In pursuance of the order of this Court made in W.A. No.50 of 2007 dated 12. 2007, the Sale Certificate was issued in favour of the Petitioner and the Petitioner was placed in possession of the property. The Authorised Officer, instead of forwarding a copy of the Sale Certificate to the Petitioner, had forwarded the same to the 3rd Respondent for the purpose of entering in Book-I, who, in turn, instead of scanning the Sale Certificate and making an entry in Book-I maintained by him, called upon the Petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1,64,795/- being the registration fee and a sum of Rs.100/- as computer charges making a total sum of Rs.1,64,895/- and the same was also inadvertently paid by the Petitioner. After realising the mistake committed by him, the Petitioner made an application on 11.08.2008 before the 3rd Respondent stating that the Sale Certificate was not an instrument as defined in section 3 of the Indian Stamp Act, and it does not require registration as required under Section 17 of the Registration Act. But, the 3rd Respondent has passed an order in his Proceedings No.142 of 2007 dated 29.08.2008 stating that the Sale Certificate not having been issued by any Civil or Revenue Court, the exemption provided under Article 18 in Schedule-I of the Indian Stamp Act 1899 is not applicable and thus, demanded 8% stamp d