IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M. DHANDAPANI, J.
M. Gopalakrishnan - Appellant
Versus
The Sub~Registrar, Guduvanchery/Neelankarai, Chennai & Another - Respondent
W.P.No. 15820 of 2014 M.P. No. 1 & 2 of 2014
Decided On : 15-03-2022
Indian Stamp Act, 1899 - Registration formalities - Benefit of Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) - Grandson's Settlement Deed - Writ Petition for Certiorarified Mandamus
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a grandson, executed a Settlement Deed in favor of his grandmother and presented the document for registration. The first respondent demanded a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- for registration based on the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
Finding of the Court:
The Court permitted the petitioner to work out his remedy as known to law in order to avail the benefit of a previous judgment in favor of the petitioner.
Issues: The issue revolved around the entitlement of the petitioner, a family member, to avail the benefit of Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for the registration of the Settlement Deed.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court did not express any opinion on the merits of the case but allowed the petitioner to pursue his remedy as known to law.
Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the direction for the petitioner to work out his remedy as known to law. No costs were awarded, and connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings/Appeal before the second respondent, culminating to the Impugned Notice of the first respondent dated 05.06.2014 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to complete the Registration formalities with respect to Doc.No.4075/2012 as stated under Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.)
The petitioner has filed this petition, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings/Appeal before the second respondent, culminating to the Impugned Notice of the first respondent dated 05.06.2014 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to complete the Registration formalities with respect to Doc.No.4075/2012 as stated under Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
2. Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for the respondents. In view of the limited relief sought for in this petition and on the consent expressed by the learned counsel appearing on either side, this petition is taken up for final disposal.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is the grandson, he executed the Settlement Deed in favour of his Grandmother and presented a document before the first respondent. However, the first respondent registered the document and he demanded a sum of Rs.30,00,000/- by way of impugned order on the ground that as per Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) of the India Stamp Act, 1899. In the relationship of the family members, strict interference has to be applied and further observed, non-family members are not entitled to avail the benefit of Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i). The very same issue was came up for consideration before this Court in W.A.No.85 of 2015. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court held in favour of the petitioner. Since, the petitioner paid the entire amount, he wants to avail such benefit. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for the above relief.
4. Though very many grounds have been raised, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it would suffice if this Court permits the petitioner to work out his remedy as known to law.
5. In view of the aforesaid submissions, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, permits the petitioner to work out his remedy as known to law in order to avail the benefit of W.A.No.85 of 2015.
6. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
The entitlement of a family member to avail the benefit of Schedule I, Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 for registration purposes.
The registering authority retains the power to collect stamp duty post-registration, but must follow due process as outlined in Section 33-A of the Indian Stamp Act.
Interpretation of statutory provisions and government clarifications to determine the classification of stamp duty under the Indian Stamp Act.
The definition of 'family' under Article 58 of the Indian Stamp Act is exhaustive, and parties not qualifying cannot claim lower stamp duty for a partition deed.
The court ruled that a Settlement Deed executed by a grandchild in favor of a grandparent qualifies for concessional stamp duty under Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act, despite the omission of....
A party must be afforded an opportunity for a hearing before adverse orders affecting them are issued, as per the due process mandated under Section 33-A of the Indian Stamp Act.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.