SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 79911

MADRAS HIGH COURT
Judge, J
Madhurambal G. v. Inspector General of Registration
Writ Petition



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Krishnan
For the Respondents: Yogesh Kannadasan

Sale certificates issued after public auctions do not require registration or stamp duty if solely for filing purposes.

Headnote:The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus for the entry of a Sale Certificate under S.89 of the Registration Act, 1908 without stamp duty. The Court observed that the sale certificate does not require registration and directed the respondents to enter the sale certificate in their records. The court confirmed that presenting the certificate for filing does not impose stamp duty requirements. Thus, the previous ruling was upheld, and the writ petition was allowed.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's basis for seeking entry of the sale certificate. (Para 1 , 3 , 4)
2. court's analysis on the need for stamp duty. (Para 5 , 6)
3. final decision regarding the non-requirement of registration. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

1. This Writ Petition has been filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 & 2 to enter the Sale Certificate dated 07.04.2021 issued and forwarded by the third respondent in Book No. 1 under S.89 of the Registration Act, 1908, in line with the order dated 22.03.2021 passed in W.P. Nos. 8084 & 18371 of 2017 by this Court, without insisting on the stamp duty.

2. Heard Mr. P. Krishnan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.

3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's husband died on 25.08.2021 leaving the petitioner and her daughter as his legal heirs. One M/s. Disc Assets Lead (India) Ltd., dealt with investments and received funds from several investors for its business, and committed default in re - payment. As ordered by this Court, the third respondent was appointed as Administrator Committee and the third respondent was permitted to deposit the sale proceeds in a Special Joint Account. The petitioner's husband being bidder in the auction sale, was declared as successful bidder in respect of the properties in the auction held on 06.03.2020. The petitioner's husband paid entire sale price, after deducting the amount from TDS as per S.194 (I)(A) of the Income Tax Act. Accordingly, the third respondent had issued sale certificate dated 07.04.2021 in favour of the petitioner's husband. It was forwarded by the third respondent to the second respondent on 07.04.2021 for making entries in Book - I as contemplated under S.89 of the Registration Act, 1908. However, the second respondent refused to register the Sale Certificate and kept the same pending.

4. In this regard, Mr. P. Krishnan, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Sale Certificate was presented before the second respondent only for the purpose of filing it in Book No - I as per S.89 of the Registration Act, 1908. Therefore, it does not require any stamp duty and registration fees.

5. The requirements for the payment of stamp duty under Art.18 of the Stamp Act and the payment of the Registration fees would arise only if presented the original Sale Certificate for registration under Art.23 of the Registration Act, 1908. In support of his contention he relied upon the judgment of this Court, in W.P. No. 34249 of 2018, dated 08.11.2021, wherein held as follows: -
6. In support of his contention, he relied upon the Judgment reported in MANU / SC / 2834/2007 : 2007 (5) SCC 745 the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India held that "when an auction purchaser derives title on confirmation of sale in his favour, and a sale certificate is issued evidencing such sale and title, no further deed of transfer from the Court is contemplated or required and that Sale certificate issued by the Court or an Officer authorized by the Court, does not require registration. S.17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, 1908 specifically provides that a certificate of sale granted to any purchaser of any property sold by a public auction by a Civil or Revenue Officer does not fall under the category of non - testamentary documents which require registration under the Act."
7. He also relied upon the Judgment reported in 2018 (3) TNCJ 541 MB N. Naresh Kumar vs. The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai 28 and another, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court held as follows:
"15. Therefore, the refusal by the Sub Registrar to file sale certificate issued by the Recovery Officer by making necessary entries in the Book in accordance with sub-section (4) of S.89 of the Registration Act is not justified. The copy of the sale certificate thus filed in Book No. 1 which contains all the relevant details and all that is the Sub Registra











Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top