IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 22.01.2019

CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

W.P. No. 5985 of 2011

M.Mohammed Rafi

...Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration

Santhome High Road

Chennai – 600 028.

2.The District Registrar

District Registration Office

Madurai South

171, Palace Road

Madurai – 625 001.

3.The Sub Registrar

Joint-I, South

Madurai South Registration

Office, 171, Palace Road

Madurai –625001. ...Respondents

PRAYER:

This 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

proceedings No.10238/R3/2010 dated 25.5.2010 on the file of

the first respondent herein and to quash the same and

direct the respondents to cancel the endorsement validating

the document with the third respondent under Serial

No.49/2006 dated 18.08.2006 within a time frame as may be

fixed by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr. P. Raja

For Respondents : Mr.P.P. Purushothaman

Government Advocate

O R D E R

This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the

proceedings No.10238/R3/2010 dated 25.5.2010 on the file of

the first respondent and direct the respondents to cancel

the endorsement validating the document by the third

respondent under Serial No.49/2006 dated 18.08.2006 within

a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that one Gopal, Son of R.N. Narasimhan got his right in the

subject matter of the property under registered Partition

deed dated 29.03.1972 effected between Narasiman and his

sons Gopal and Kannan. The B-schedule property was

allotted to the said Gopal under the said partition deed.

Based on the partition deed, Gopal effects a sale in favour

of his mother one Pappammal residing at Madurai at

Parasala, Kerala State under Document No.1075/1992 dated

25.02.1992. Subsequently, the said Gopal cancelled the

sale deed under registered Document No.948 of 2002 dated

01.06.2002 at Parasala, Kerala State. On 11.02.2006 the

said Pappammal, mother of Gopal died. The said Gopal gave

General Power of Attorney in favour of one Mohammed Salim,

on 07.04.2006. On 18.01.2008, the property was sold to the

petitioner by the said Salim as a Power Agent, under a

registered sale deed in Document No.386 of 2008 before the

Sub Registrar of Madurai South.

The property was

registered and transferred in the name of the petitioner.

The property tax, water tax, drainage tax and the

electricity charges are being paid in the name of the

petitioner.

3. Thereafter, one Kannan who is the brother of the

said Gopal, along with his other sisters, namely Andal,

Thayarammal and Malliga sold the schedule property on

07.05.2008, to one Navaneethan and his wife Indhumathi.

When the petitioner came to know the said fact and that

they are trying to transfer the property to their name, the

petitioner applied for the Encumbrance certificate of the

property and found that the sale deed dated 25.02.1992

executed by the petitioner vide Document No.1075 of 1992

has been re-validated and deficit stamp duty was collected

by the 3^rd respondent. On receipt of the communication

under the Right to Information Act, the petitioner filed a

revision before the 1^st respondent. Since the revision was

rejected by the 1^st respondent, the present writ petition

has been filed before this Court, on the ground that

initiation of revalidation is barred by limitation, under

Section 19-B(4) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.

4. It is further submitted that Section 19-B(4) of

the Act was amended by Tamil Nadu Act No.39 of 1999 with

effect from 22.02.2000. The said amendment does not have

any retrospective effect. I