COMMON ORDER

Questioning the rejection of the representation vide the impugned order and negating the refund of the amounts paid by way of stamp duty and registration fee by the 1st respondent, the present petitions have been filed. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that it is a company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and involved in the business of real estate, housing and property development. The company was incorporated in the year 2009 and is associated with VGN Group of Companies.

3. It is the further case of the petitioner that the lands in Survey Nos.330, 335/1,, 2, 338, 340/1, 2, 341, 342, 344/1, 2, 345, 471, 472/1A, 1B, 2, 473, 474, 475, 482, 484, 485, 486, 487/1, 2, 489/1, 2, 490, 501, 502, 512/1, 512/2, 515/1, 515/2, 516, 51`7, 518, 519, 520, 521/1, 521/2, 523/2, 524/1, 2, 526/1A, 1B, 1C, 2, 527,539/1, 542, 543, 544, 545/1, 2A, 2B1, 2B2, 546, 547, 548, 550/1, 2, 551/1, 2, 3 and 552 situated in Ambattur Village, Ambattur Taluk, Thiruvallur District measuring a total extent of 60.86 acres was purchased by one Mr.V.N.Devadoss in the year 2004 under registered sale deeds by paying the requisite stamp duty and registration charges under Doc. No.6939/2004 and patta was also issued in the name of V.N.Devadoss.

4. It is the further case of the petitioner that the said V.N.Devadoss subsequently joined with other third parties and formed a partnership firm by the name of “V.Guruswamy Naidu & Co.” in the year 2007 and towards capital contribution to the said firm, the said V.N.Devadoss brought in the aforesaid lands held by him into the stock of the firm. It is the further case of the petitioner that the deed of the partnership firm had a specific clause in which V.N.Devadoss had declared that the property would form part and parcel of the partnership firm and that he would have no interest in the same except as a partner of the firm and the Partnership Deed was also registered with the Registrar of Firms after paying necessary fees and following the due procedure involved.

5. It is the further case of the petitioner that the partnership firm was later converted into a joint stock company, which is the petitioner company. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the Memorandum of Association of the petitioner company, Clause C (VI) clearly mandates that all properties belonging to the above partnership firm would become the properties of the petitioner company for running the business of the company. It is the further case of the petitioner, that though the properties of the Partnership Firm became the properties of the petitioner company, however, the patta, originally issued in favour of V.N.Devadoss was yet to be changed in favour of the petitioner company by the authorities concerned.

6. It is the further case of the petitioner that in the year 2013, for the purpose of raising funds for the development of housing projects, one of the company belonging to the petitioner’s group of companies, decided to mortgage part of the above mentioned property as additional security. Therefore, the petitioner company first entered into an Indenture of Mortgage/Mortgage Deed on 21.3.2013 whereby 10.959 acres of lands from the total extent of 60.86 acres of the abovementioned property was placed as collateral security. It is further averred that subsequently another separate Indenture of Mortgage was entered with the Mortgage/Debenture Trustee on 13.06.2013, whereby another 9.98 acres was placed as collateral security for the purpose of raising funds. The said deeds of mortgage were duly registered before the 3rd respondent and assigned Nos.10577/13 and 8400/2013. Appropriate stamp duty and registration fee, in accordance with Article 40 (b) under Schedule I of the Indian Stamp Act was also paid for both the deeds.

7. It is the further case of the petitioner that even at the time of mortgaging the property, patta had not been mutated in favour of the petitioner company and, therefore, the Bank/Mortgagee in the Mortgage D