In all these cases, the issue involved relate to the conduct of the Registering Authority in not releasing the documents after registration on the ground of suspected under-valuation of properties which are the subject matter of the respective documents.

2. W.P.No.25721 of 2007:-

The 4th respondent, Tata Tea Limited, Calcutta, represented by its Senior Vice President and Company Secretary and Vice President of the Company, is a company incorporated under the Companies Act has executed a deed of transfer for a consideration of Rs.40,08,00,000/-on 312. 2005 in favour of the petitioner, Tata Coffee Ltd. which is an existing company incorporated under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The said document was presented for registration before the second respondent, the Sub Registrar, Anarnallais, Coimbatore District on 1. 2006. The second respondent has given the document number as P.No.2/ 2006 on the basis that the vendor has to produce the original patta book which was not available. The necessary stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act to the extent of Rs.3,20,64,000/-was paid apart from the payment of registration fees of Rs.4,08,000/-. The sale was in respect of 9873.86 acres of lands situated in Pannimade Estate in the Registration District of Tiruppur.

2(a). The petitioner has written a letter to the second respondent on 5. 2007 for the release of the document. However, the second respondent has not chosen to release the same. The petitioner understands that the document number has been renumbered as 2026/2007 in May, 2007. Even as on date, the document has not been returned and therefore, the writ petition has been filed for direction against the second and third respondents, viz., the Sub Registrar and District Revenue Officer (Stamps) to hand over or release the deed dated 312. 2005 bearing registration No.2026/07.

3. In W.P.Nos.33556 to 33582 of 2007, the petitioners who belong to the same family have purchased different parts of vacant lands in Puzhal village, Ambathur taluk, Tiruvellore District for valuable consideration under deeds of transfer, which were registered in the Office of the Sub Registrar, Red Hills, the second respondent in the said writ petitions as document Nos.3920/99; 1948/99, 6462/99, 4942/99, 1944/99, 4933/99, 3547/98, 3512/99, 2259/99, 4878/00, 1949/99, 7042/99, 6930/99, 6937/99, 6931/99, 3376/99, 3389/99, 6460/99, 1945/99, 987/99, 4761/99, 2759/99, 2318/99, 1950/99, 6461/99, 251/98 and 1946/99.

3(a). According to the petitioners, they have paid the stamp duty as per the market value and the registration charges have also been paid. It is the case of the petitioners that the second respondent, Sub Registrar has referred the documents for valuation under section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 (in short, "the Act") for determination of the market value in spite of the fact that the documents were registered in the year 1999 itself. The petitioners have not been informed by the second respondent or the first respondent about the enquiry and no notice in Form-I has been received by any of the petitioners. The petitioners have approached the second respondent on several occasions, however, there was no proper reply from the respondents, except stating that the petitioners may have to pay the differential stamp duty.

3(b). According to the petitioners, they have paid the stamp duty for the market value as on the date of execution and presentation of documents for registration. In the absence of any reply from the respondents, the petitioners have made representations by registered letters dated 25. 2005 and thereafter by legal notice dated 17. 2007 apart from the subsequent representation dated 9. 2007. But, the respondents have not chosen either to reply or to release the documents. The petitioners would rely upon the provisions of section 47-A of the Stamp Act which contemplates under various subsections about the procedure to be followed to find out and ascertain the actual value after giving