Back
2019 Supreme(Mad) 2153
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G. Jayachandran, J.
V. Murugesan - Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai & Others - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3231 of 2018 & W.M.P. No. 3964 of 2018
Decided On : 21-11-2019
For the Petitioner:K. Mohana Murali, Advocate.
For the Respondents: T.M. Pappiah, Special Government Pleader.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for completion of proceedings under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act and the payment of deficit stamp duty and registration fees before registration of the deed.
Headnote:
Stamp Duty - Power of Attorney - Section 47 – A of the Indian Stamp Act - [47-A] - The court discussed the refusal to register a Power of Attorney deed due to the charge created over the property under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. The court highlighted the legal provisions of Section 47-A and its implications on the registration of the Power of Attorney deed. The court also emphasized the need for completion of proceedings under Section 47-A and the payment of deficit stamp duty and registration fees before registration of the deed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought registration of a Power of Attorney deed, which was refused by the 2nd respondent citing a charge created over the property under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. The petitioner contended that the appeal against the order passed in Section 47-A proceedings was pending before the 1st respondent, and hence, the refusal to register the deed was malafide.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the refusal to register the Power of Attorney deed was correct due to the charge over the property, but the demand to pay the deficit stamp duty and registration fees pending appeal before the 1st respondent was incorrect. The court directed the 1st respondent to pass an order on the appeal within three months and allowed registration of the deed upon payment of the applicable stamp duty and registration fees.
Issues: The issues revolved around the refusal to register a Power of Attorney deed due to the charge created over the property under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act and the pending appeal against the Section 47-A proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the refusal to register the Power of Attorney deed was justified due to the charge over the property, but emphasized the need for completion of proceedings under Section 47-A and the payment of deficit stamp duty and registration fees before registration of the deed.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition was disposed of with a direction to the 1st respondent to pass an order on the appeal within three months, and upon payment of the applicable stamp duty and registration fees, the Power of Attorney deed or any deed presented by the petitioner shall be registered and returned.
JUDGMENT :
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records pertaining by the impugned order in Ref. Nil dated 29.01.2018 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same thereby directing the respondents to register the General Power of Attorney, dated 29.01.2018 presented to the 2nd respondent and pass order.
1. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Petitioner and the Learned Special Government Pleader for the Respondents 1 to 3.
2. The Petitioner herein has present a Power of Attorney deed before the 2nd respondent appointing Mr.V.Dhanasekar as his agent to deal with the properties, which is subject to charge under Section 47 – A of the Registration Act.
3. The 2nd respondent has declined to register the Power of Attorney deed and had intimated the petitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty and registration fees of Rs.62,54,575/- before presenting the Power of Attorney document for registration.
4. The above said order passed on 29.01.2018 is challenged in this Writ Petition.
The background facts of this Writ Petition starts with the decree passed by the City Civil Court, Chennai in the specific performance suit filed by the Writ Petition in O.S.No.3259 of 2011, dated 20.09.2011. Pursuant to the decree, the sale deed was presented for registration at 2nd respondent Office on 17.10.2013. The document was retained on entertaining doubt over the correctness of the property value disclosed. Hence, the 2nd respondent referred the matter for adjudication under Section 47 – A of the Indian Stamp Act.
5. Aggrieved by the action of the 2nd respondent, the petitioner approached this Court by way of Writ Petition and sought for released of the document. This Court, in W.P.No.13313 of 2014 filed by the petitioner issued the following direction to the 2nd respondent in its order dated 19.03.2015.
"i. The second respondent shall return the document registered as 5750 of 2013 dated 17-10-2013 with an endorsement on the said document to the effect that a reference under Section 47-A(1) of the Indian Stamp Act is pending;
ii. The factum of pendency of the reference under Section 47-A(1) of the said Act in respect of the said document shall be entered into in the encumbrance register also so as to protect the interests of the purchasers for knowledge;
iii. Pending the final order to be passed under Section 47A(1) of the said Act, there shall be a charge over the property in favour of the Government as per Section 47A(4) of the said Act;
iv. After adjudication proceedings are completed including appeal, for which the petitioner is entitled to under the provisions of the Indian Stamp Act and after payment of the amount towards stamp duty ultimately arrived at, necessary endorsement shall be made both in the document concerned as well as encumbrance register that the proceedings under Section 47-A of the said Act have been terminated;”
6. Intra Court appeal against this order filed by the Registration Department was dismissed by the Division Bench on 24.06.2015 in W.A.No.826 of 2015. The Special Leave Petition filed against the order passed in W.A.No.826 of 2015 was also dismissed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P.(C).No.27705 of 2015 on 30.11.2017, with following observation.
“However, the proceedings initiated under Section 47-A(I) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from today in accordance with law. The respondent shall co-operate in the proceedings and shall not seek any undue adjournment in the matter.”
7. Despite direction from the Supreme Court, the respondents failed to return the document which forced the petitioner to file Contempt Petition and on filing the Contempt Petition, the document was returned to the petitioner with endorsement about the charge over the property.
8. Now, when the petitioner wanted to get the Power of Attorney deed registered the same is refused citing the charge create
