Increase in market value not a reason for suspecting under valuation.

1. In W.P. No.23097 of 2001, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the proceedings of the 3rd respondent in his proceedings No. 231 of 2001 dated 2.8.2001 and quash the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent herein to return the sale deed to the petitioner herein, which is pending in P. No. 1319 of 1996 on the file of the 3rd respondent.

2. In W.P. No.7908 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to return the sale deed dated 8.6.2001 executed by the Tamil Nadu Housing Board in favour of the petitioner herein and registered on 25.7.2001 under Document No.2446 of 2001 at the office of the 2nd respondent.

3. In W.P. No. 9909 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/146/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 4.7.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

4. In W.P. No. 9910 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/138/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 21.6.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

5. In W.P. No. 9911 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/147/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 21.6.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

6. In W.P. No. 9912 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/137/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 19.6.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

7. In W.P. No. 9913 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/136/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 19.6.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

8. In W.P. No. 10626 of 2002, the petitioner prays for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to release the document pending on the file of the 2nd respondent vide Document No. P/127/2001/S.R.O., Anna Nagar, Chennai-40, dated 8.6.2001 without demanding stamp duty for the building cost as per G.O. Ms. No.231 Housing and Urban Development Department dated 27.3.2001.

9. In all these writ petitions, this Court directed the learned Government Advocate to take notice. This Court also requested the learned Advocate General to make his submissions after getting instructions as innumerable petitions identical in nature are being filed on a day to day basis. Further, despite a binding pronouncement by two Division Benches of this Court, the Registrars in the State in disregard to the pronouncements have been withholding the documents executed and presented by the Housing Board in favour of the allottees either plot or flat, as the case may be and they insist for payment of stamp duty on the basis of value as assessed by them as on the date of execution of the sale deed.

10. The learned Advocate General took instructions from the State Government as well as the Inspector General of Registration and made his submissions in all the writ petitions.

11. All th