SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2002 Supreme(Mad) 561

D.MURUGESAN
O. N. S. Hyder Ali – Appellant
Versus
The Sub Registrar District Registrar Cadre – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For Petitioner:S.M. Hameed Mohideen, Advocate.
For Respondent: M.G.H. Varadarajan, AGP.

Judgment :-

1. The petitioner purchased a property consisting of house and ground premises at Door No. 30, St. Xavier Street, Madras-1 by sale deed dated 4.10.91. He got the said sale deed registered in the office of the Sub Registrar of Sowcarpet in document no. 605 of 1991 on the same day. The value of the property was Rs. 4,50,000/-. He paid initially a sum of Rs. 58,500/- towards stamp duty and a further sum of Rs. 11,700/- towards deficit stamp duty. The petitioner also paid a sum of Rs. 5,419/-towards the registration fee. The petitioner was also asked to pay a further sum of Rs. 500/- by way of additional stamp duty which was paid on 30.10.91. After the registration, the sale deed was released on 30.10.91.

2. However, by the impugned notice dated ‘Nil’ sent on 21.2.95 which was received by the petitioner on 22.2.95, the Sub Registrar, Sowcarpet directed the petitioner to pay a further sum of Rs. 45,823/-towards registration charges and stamp duty in respect of the sale deed which was registered on

4.10.91. The said notice is under challenge in this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for petitioner.

4. No counter affidavit has been filed. The facts relating to the reg

















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top