Stamp duty must be paid based on the prevailing guideline value on the date of registration, not suit valuation.

1. This revision is directed against the order dated 16.10.2014 made in E.A.No.49 of 2014 in E.P.No.30 of 2012 in O.S.No.297 of 2008 on the file of District Munsif Court, Sholinghur.

2. The petitioner is the plaintiff in O.S.No.297 of 2008 which was filed for specific performance of the sale agreement dated 02.01.1987. The suit was decreed on 28.10.2009. Based on the decree, the petitioner filed an execution petition in E.P.No.30 of 2012 for execution of the sale deed. The Executing Court has called for report from the Joint Sub Registrar, Stuartpet, Arakonam to ascertain the market value of the suit property. The Sub Registrar submitted report stating that the land was developed as house sites and the market value of the property was Rs.1,68,000/-. Subsequently, the petitioner filed E.A.No.49 of 2014 for direction to the Joint Sub Registrar No.1, Stuartpet, Arakonnam to furnish the guideline value of the petition property as land value, considering the surrounding guideline value of the land. The Executing Court dismissed the application. Aggrieved by the order, the present revision is filed.

3. Mr. A. Gouthaman, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner purchased the suit property as agricultural land and in the agreement also, the land is described as agricultural land and the petitioner had purchased the property for sale consideration of Rs.3,000/- and therefore the sale deed has to be registered only as agricultural land for value shown in the sale agreement. The learned counsel further submitted that if the document does not set forth the market value, the authorities can initiate action under Section 47A for the Stamp Act.

4. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Manoj Kumar reported in 2010 (4) SCC 350 has held that the parties have to pay the stamp duty as per the guideline value on the date of registration. The Division Bench of this Court in V. Sivakumar v. IG of Registration reported in 2011 (5) MLJ 30 has held as follows -

“15. The Honourable Supreme Court held that In a suit for specific performance, after the dispute was ultimately decided by the Supreme Court, which took long time, when the sale deed was presented before the registering authority, the registering authority would insist on payment of the stamp duty as per the prevailing guide line value on the date of the presentation of the instrument for registration. The Honourable Supreme Court has also held that the stamp duty has to be paid as per the prevailing guideline value as on the date of registration even though the agreement to convey the property entered long back. By applying that theory in this case, necessarily, the holder of the sale certificates have to pay the stamp duty as per the guide line value prevailing as on the date of presentation of the sale certificates. The valuation of the property on the date of auction is totally different when compared to the value of the property on the date of presentation of the sale certificates for registration, especially, in this case, as per the dates and events mentioned above, the delay was only on the part of the purchasers and therefore, they are liable to pay the stamp duty as on the date of registration of the instrument. Consequently, the registering authorities are empowered to refer the matter under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act for determination of the correct value of the property apart from collecting the actual stamp duty at Rs.9.30 crores being the total value of the property as stated in the sale certificates and the corresponding registration charges. Therefore, we hold that the appellants are liable to pay stamp duty on the actual value of the property apart from registration charges and the registering authority is empowered to refer the matter under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act for determination of the correct value of the property. Consequently, we find no reason to interfere with the reasoned order of the learned single Judg