Rectification deeds correcting typographical errors do not trigger additional stamp duty if the property's nature and valuation remain unchanged.

JUDGMENT

This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred as against the order passed by the first respondent, dated 21.12.2012, wherein the first respondent has passed an order in the appeal preferred by the appellant herein.

2. For the sake of convenience and brevity, the parties herein after will be referred to as per their status / ranking in the Tribunal.

3. According to the appellant, he purchased the properties in Panagudi SRO Limit in R.S.Nos.25 and 26 for an extent of 10 acres through Document No.863 of 1996 for valuable consideration of Rs.1,04,000/-. In that document, there is a typographical error and was mentioned as western side south west instead of eastern side south west 10 acres. Therefore, they executed a rectification deed, dated 16.09.1999. In that document, the stamp duty were fixed under Section 47 (B) and thereby, the document was referred to the Stamp Collector under Section 47 A (1) of the Stamps Act and the Stamp Collector fixed the value of sum of Rs.27 per square feet and thereby, the stamp duty fixed as Rs.14,11,824/- and after deduction of the stamp duty, already paid the balance of Rs.13,99,324/- has to be paid by the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant / petitioner has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal.

4. The first respondent after hearing both sides passed an order by confirming the order of the Stamps Collector. As against the same, the present Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been preferred.

5. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant / petitioner would contend that the appellant / petitioner have purchased the property in the year 1996 and there was a typographical error. Thereby, they executed a rectification deed on 16.09.1999. For their rectification deed, the appellant need not pay any stamp duty for the value of the property, since already the property was purchased and stamp duty paid for the value of the property and the present deed is only for rectification of four boundaries. Therefore, the question of application of schedule 1 or application of Section 47 A of Indian Stamp Act would not arise. But the third respondent had referred the document for fixing the value of the property to the second respondent Stamp Collector and the second respondent also fixed value of Rs.27 per square feet. As against the said order, the appellant / petitioner has preferred this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal. In the appeal also, the Appellate Authority, namely, the first respondent without considering the nature of document confirming the order of the second respondent. Therefore, the order passed by the respondents are liable to be set aside by allowing this appeal.

6. To support the contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant, he relied upon the judgment reported in 2010 (1) MLJ 246 [ P.Uthamaraj Vs. The District Registrar Chennai , South Chenni 15 and Others].

7. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would contend that originally, the document was registered in the year 1996 and thereafter, the appellant herein has executed a rectification deed. At that time, the District Registrar fixed the value of property under Section 47 B of the Stamp Act and the appellant has not come forward to pay the above said amount. Thereby, the Sub-Registrar had referred the document to the Special Collector Stamps under Section 47 A (1) and the Special Collector Stamps also after enquiry, fixed the value as Rs.27 per square feet and fixed the stamp duty and demanded the remaining amount. Aggrieved by the order passed by the Special Collector Stamps, the appellant has filed the appeal before the first respondent and the first respondent also after considering the nature of property and nature of document, confirming the order passed by the second respondent. Therefore, the authorities have passed order only as per the provisions of Stamps Act and based on the guideline value of the property. Therefore, the order passed by the respondents