The Registration Act, 1908 outlines the procedure for registering deeds; this case clarifies fee categorization and jurisdiction for registration disputes.

1. This is a suit filed by one of the executants of a document under S.77 of the Indian Registration Act , 1908, for a decree directing the Defendants, who are the appropriate registering authorities, to register the document in question within 30 days from the date of the passing of the decree in this suit.

2. The short facts necessary for the purpose of this suit are that the plaintiff is the administratrix of the estate of one Dhundiraj Balwant Divekar who died intestate in Bombay on the 10th of October 1962, leaving him surviving as his only heirs according to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, his widow the Plaintiff herself and two sons, one named Suresh, and the other a minor named Bakul. The Plaintiff obtained a grant of Letters of Administration to the estate of the deceased Dhundiraj from this Court on 21st May 1964, and having completed the administration of the said estate, paid to the said Suresh a sum of Rs. 52,106, and paid to herself in her personal capacity as the heir of the deceased Dhundiraj, and to herself as the mother and natural guardian of her minor son Bakul, a sum of Rs. 1,04,212/- made up of Rs. 29,212 in cash and Rs. 75,000 being the value of a flat on Pedder Road in Bombay. By agreement between the parties, the share of the deceased in the business of United Sound Services was continued to be held in common between his heirs, the said Suresh, the Plaintiff and the said minor Bakul, and was not included in the distribution of the estate mentioned above. On the 10th of August 1966 an instrument which was called a Deed of Transfer was executed between the parties, a copy of which is annexed to the plaint and marked 'A' and it is in respect of the said Deed that the present suit has been filed. It is, therefore, necessary to set out in some detail the nature of the said Deed.

3. After several recitals, the operative part of the said Deed declares that the plaintiff, as administratrix, has made the payments mentioned above to the said Suresh, and to herself in the dual capacity which she holds as stated above, and states that the said Suresh as well as the plaintiff herself 'acknowledge' that they have received the respective amounts due to them as well as the said flat 'in full satisfaction' of their respective shares in the property and effects of the deceased Dhundiraj, except his share in the business of United Sound Services. The concluding portion of the said Deed, which is very important for the purpose of this case, is in the following terms : -
'And the said Suresh and the said Leela for herself and as the mother and natural guardian of the said Bakul do hereby discharge Leela the Administratrix from all their respective rights, claims and interest in the property and effects mentioned in the said Schedule I, hereunder written and from all actions, accounts, claims and demands in respect thereof'.
It may be mentioned that Schedule I to the said Deed contains an enumeration of all the property belonging to the estate of the deceased, other than the share of the deceased in the United Sound Services which is shown in Schedule II to the said Deed.

4. In accordance with the adjudication by the Assistant Superintendent of Stamps, Bombay, the said Deed was stamped with a stamp of Rs. 10/-. After its execution, the said Deed was presented for registration to the first Defendant on the 24th of October 1966, and the first Defendant computed the registration fee payable thereon on an ad valorem basis at Rs. 679 which he demanded from the plaintiff. The Plaintiff declined to pay the s