BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10.02.2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3085 & 3087 of 2026 T.Mahalingam ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai - 600 028.

2. The Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Trichy Zone, Edamalaipatti Pudur, Trichy - 620 023.

3. The District Registrar (Administration)

Karur District, Karur. 4. The Sub-Registrar,, Karur West Sub-Registrar Office, Karur. ... Respondents PRAYER :-

Writ Petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 4^th Respondent in Na.Ka.No.686/2025 dated 31.12.2025, quash the same as illegal and arbitrary, and consequently direct the 4^th Respondent to forthwith register and release the Sale Deed in Document No.P134/2025 dated 23.10.2025 without insisting upon payment of any alleged deficit stamp duty and registration charges.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.N.Ramanathan, For Respondents : Mr.K.R.Badurus Zaman, Government Advocate

O R D E R

This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the 4^th Respondent in Na.Ka.No.686/2025 dated 31.12.2025 and also seeking for a consequential direction, directing the 4^th Respondent to forthwith register and release the Sale Deed in Document No.P134/2025 dated 23.10.2025 without insisting upon payment of any alleged deficit stamp duty and registration charges.

2. By consent, this Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage itself.

3. According to the petitioner, the subject property was developed as “The Presidents Park” following DTCP approval. After obtaining plan approval, the owners of the subject property constructed a multi-storey building name “Ram Villas”. The petitioner decided to buy Flat No.302 on 23.10.2025. When the petitioner presented the said sale deed for registration, the 4^th respondent refused to register the same citing the reason that it is under value and by way of impugned notice, the 4^th respondent demanded the to pay the additional dues for stamp duty and registration charges. Challenging the same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents would submit that the value mentioned in the document is very low. Therefore, they have recalculated the composite value of the property and communicated it to the petitioner through the impugned order. If the petitioner has paid the additional stamp duty, they would register the document.

5. This Court heard the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. The petitioner presented a sale deed for registration on

23.10.2025, which was accepted and received by the respondents. However, the document was kept pending on the ground of short payment of stamp duty. Under these circumstances, this Court is of the view that the respondents ought to have registered the document and, if they found that there is deficit stamp duty, referred the matter under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, for redetermination of the property value. Keeping the document pending without following this procedure is improper. Therefore, this Court is inclined to set aside the impugned order.

7. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside. The 4^th respondent is directed to register the sale deed dated 23.10.2025 and release the said sale deed within a period of two days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the 4^th respondent feels that the property has been under valued, it is for him to refer the matter to the concerned officer under Section 47A of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, for redetermination of the value of the property.

8. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is allowed.

There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

10.02.20