IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 06.01.2026

CORAM :

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE

and

W.M.P.No.45306 of 2025

Prem Textiles,

Represented by its Proprietrix Mrs.Girija KV,

No.208/209, 3^rd Cross,

Royal Shelters, Devarachikkanahalli,

Bangalore South, Karnataka – 560 076. ... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The Inspector General of Registration,

100, Santhome High Road,

Pattinapakkam, Chennai – 600 028.

2.The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Integrated Building of Registration Department, Veppamara Street, Velppadi, Vellore – 632 001.

3.Special Collector (Stamps),

NH-40, Ranipet Collector Office,

Ranipet, Tamil Nadu – 632 401.

4.The District Registrar,

Integrated Building of Registration Department,

No.230, 5th Gandhi Road, Swalpet,

Gandhi Road, Arakkonam – 631 001.

5.The Sub Registrar,

Taluk Office Campus, Arakkonam – 631 001.

6.Thasildar, Arakkonam, Ranipet District.

7.Zonal Deputy Thasildar, Arakkonam, Ranipet District. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the Application No.2023/0103/37/245610 dated 20.06.2023 issued by the 7^th respondent quash the same, and consequentially direct the 5^th respondent to transfer patta forthwith in favour of the petitioner on the basis of the registered sale deed dated 06.05.2022. For Petitioner : Ms.Jayanthi K Shah For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander Special Government Pleader *****

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated

20.06.2023 passed by the 7^th respondent, rejecting the petitioner’s application seeking for issuance of patta for the property morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition.

2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the impugned order is a non-speaking order and has been issued by total non- application of mind to the fact that the petitioner has complied with the directions issued u/s 47A of the Stamps Act (in short ‘the Act’) by paying the deficit stamp duty for the subject sale deed through which the petitioner become the absolute owner of the property.

3. A counter has also been filed by the 5^th respondent on behalf of the respondents 1, 2 and 4 and in paragraph No.7, the 5^th respondent has categorically stated that the petitioner has paid the deficit stamp duty as demanded u/s 47A of the Act, and has also obtained a sale deed in their favour, which is dated 06.05.2022, registered as Doc.No.1786 of 2022 in the office of Sub Registrar, Arakkonam. However, as seen from the impugned order, the aforesaid fact has not been considered, but by a non-speaking order, the petitioner’s application seeking for issuance of patta in their favour has been rejected. Since the impugned order is a non-speaking order, as the order has not considered the fact that the petitioner has already obtained the sale deed for the property morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition by paying deficit stamp duty as demanded u/s 47A of the Stamp Act, this Court is of the considered view that the impugned order has to be quashed and the matter has to be remanded back to the 7^th respondent for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with law, after giving due consideration to the fact that the petitioner has paid the deficit stamp duty as demanded u/s 47A of the Stamp Act and has also obtained a sale deed dated 06.05.2022 registered as Doc.No.1786 of 2022 in the office of Sub Registrar, Arakkonam.

4. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 20.06.2023 issued by the 7^th respondent is hereby quashed and the matter is remanded back to the 7^th respondent for fresh consideration of the petitioner’s application seeking for issuance of patta for the property morefully described in the affidavit filed in support of this writ petition, after giving due consideration to the fact that the petitioner has paid the deficit stamp duty as demanded u/s 47A