Refund applications under Section 52 of the Kerala Stamp Act must satisfy conditions but are not strictly bound by a six-month limitation if bona fides are proven.

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 5^th day of March, 2026 The petitioner is represented by her power of attorney holder, who is the husband. The petitioner entered into an agreement of sale of an immovable property having an extent of 5 Ares and a residential building situated in Re.Sy.No.147/11 of Chethippuzha Village, Changanassery Taluk belonging to one Bijoy George. Ext.P1 is the sale deed. Pursuant to Ext.P1 agreement, on 07.01.2023, the petitioner purchased stamp paper worth Rs.10 lakhs for execution of the sale deed. Ext.P2 is the pay in slip dated 07.01.2023 for the purchase of the stamp. Since the Bank has not sanctioned the loan, the sale deed could not be materialised and the stamp paper remained unused. Therefore, the petitioner made an application to the Taluk Office, Changanassery as per Ext.P3 for refund of the value of the stamp. Thereafter, by Ext.P5, the Tahsildar, Changanassery informed the petitioner vide letter dated 23.09.2023 that the application has to be submitted before the RDO, Chengannur. The petitioner filed an application on 30.11.2023 for refund of the value of the stamp before the 3^rd respondent.

Thereafter, the petitioner was called for a hearing as per Ext.P6 on 18.12.2024 at 11.30 a.m. After considering the application, the 3^rd respondent rejected the application by Ext.P9 dated 25.12.2024. The petitioner challenges Ext.P9 in this writ petition and seeks for a writ of mandamus directing the 2^nd respondent to refund the value of the stamp paper purchased and unused by the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied on the judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) No.27720 of 2015 wherein, a similar issue arose and this Court considered the purport of Section 52 of the Kerala Stamp Act and held that Section 52 (c) only stipulates satisfaction by the District Collector for the purpose of refund of the stamp paper. It cannot be taken as a period of limitation as contemplated under Section 48. Therefore, rigour of limitation could not be attributed or applied for Section 52 (c). In appropriate case, it is open for the District Collector to grant refund, even if the delivery of such stamp paper is after six months of the purchase. In the absence of consequence provided for this particular provision, it can only be treated as directory, not as mandatory. Therefore, that writ petition was allowed and the 2^nd respondent therein was directed to take appropriate steps to refund the unused stamp paper within six months.

3. A statement has been filed by the 3^rd respondent wherein, it is stated that the petitioner has submitted an application for refund on 30.11.2023 of Rs.10 lakhs being the value of e-stamp. The application was examined by the Tahsildar, Changanassery and Sub Registrar, Changanassery and a notice was issued to the applicant on 18.12.2024 to hear her. The petitioner’s husband, Jacob George, attended the hearing and based on the report of hearing, it was noted that the stamp was purchased on 07.01.2023 and since the sale did not materialise due to financial difficulty, the present application is filed. It is stated that under Section 52 of the Kerala Stamp Act , 1959, “stamp or stamps which have not been spoiled or rendered unfit or useless for the purpose intended but for which he has not immediate use, the Collector shall repay to such person the value of stamp or stamps in money, deducting six paise for each rupee or portion of a rupee, upon such person delivering the same to be cancelled, and proving to the Collector’s satisfaction.

(a) that such stamp or stamps were purchased by such person with a bonafide intention to use them;

(b) that he has paid the full price thereof; and (c) that they were so purchased within the p