##PAGE1##

W.P.(MD)No.19087 of 2025

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 18.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

W.P.(MD)No.19087 of 2025

and

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.14628 and 14629 of 2025

R.Muthulakshmi ... Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Special Deputy Collector (Stamp),

Virudhunagar (Po),

Virudhunagar District.

2.The Sub Registrar,

Kunnur,

Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to

issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the impugned

order in Tha.Pa.S.1/006/2025, dated .05.2025 issued by the first respondent and

quash the same as illegal and consequently, direct the respondents to hand over

the registered original sale deed in Document No.605 of 2024, dated 19.02.2024,

on the file of the second respondent.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.J.Karthick

For Respondents : Mr.K.S.Selva Ganesan

Additional Government Pleader

____________

Page 1 of 9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 07:35:58 pm )

##PAGE2## ##PAGE3##

W.P.(MD)No.19087 of 2025

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that despite

inspection of the property and the conclusion arrived at by the respondents that

the land is agricultural in nature, a higher valuation applicable to layouts has been

fixed. He contended that the petitioner purchased the land by borrowing money

and, unless the document is returned, the petitioner would be deprived of the

benefits available under various Government schemes meant for agricultural

activities.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the lands are

largely barren, with agricultural activities being carried on in certain portions,

which fact is disputed by the respondents. He would therefore submit that the

impugned order has been passed without proper application of mind and is liable

to be set aside, as the nature of the land has not been considered. On the contrary,

the respondents have proceeded on the assumption that the land is situated near

the Town or road and is suitable for promoting plots by forming a layout and

passed the impugned order. Hence, the present Writ Petition.

____________

Page 3 of 9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 07:35:58 pm )

##PAGE4## ##PAGE5## ##PAGE6## ##PAGE7##

W.P.(MD)No.19087 of 2025

13. Even assuming that the respondents intended to rely upon the valuation

of nearby plots, they were bound to consider the various factors involved in plot

development, including promoter profits, often ranging from 100% to even 200%

and provide appropriate deductions. None of these aspects have been considered.

The valuation has therefore been fixed without proper application of mind.

14. In the present case, it is an admitted position that the land purchased by

the petitioner is agricultural land. Hence, the respondents cannot import

commercial considerations applicable to layout formation and plot sales while

determining the value for stamp duty purposes. The impugned order is thus

unsustainable and liable to be quashed.

15. Accordingly, the impugned order is quashed. Since the document has

already been registered, the respondents are directed to return the document to the

petitioner within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order.

____________

Page 7 of 9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 02/01/2026 07:35:58 pm )

##PAGE8## ##PAGE9## Click Here to Read the rest of this document