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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 24633

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
M/s.OM Logistics Pvt. Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Office – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 11045 of 2026 | W.M.P.Nos.11045 & 11047 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.Ashutosh Kumar Shukla
For the Respondents: Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader

The court reaffirms the authority of the Collector to adjudicate valuation disputes under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act with due consideration for the petitioner's arguments.

Headnote:This writ petition challenges the impugned orders by the respondents refusing to release a sale deed due to valuation issues under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act. The petitioner contends the property is residential, while the respondents claim it is industrial. The court directs the Collector to adjudicate the valuation dispute, allowing a hearing to the petitioner and considering supporting documents within four weeks. No coercive measures against the petitioner will be taken during this period. The matter remains open for the Collector's jurisdiction.

Table of Content
1. facts of the case concerning improper valuation of property (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's mandate for adjudication by collector under the stamp act (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. final ruling on petitioner's request and process outlined (Para 7)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 18-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE and W.M.P.Nos.11045 & 11047 of 2026 M/s.OM Logistics Pvt. Ltd., A company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, Having its registered address at

130, Transport Centre, Ring Road, Punjab Bagh, New Delhi-110 035.

..Petitioner Vs

1. The Deputy Inspector General of Registration Office at 26F+GV8, Integrated building for offices of the commercial Taxes and Registration Department, Fanepet, Nandanam, Chennai-600 035.

2. The District Registrar (Administration), No.184/12G State Highway 50, SP nagar, Tiruvallur-602 001.

..Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order dated 10.09.2025 in Se.Mu. Order No.5323/ E2/ 2025 passed by the second respondent District Registrar (Administration), Tiruvallur and the consequential order No.5463/1/2025 dated 03.02.2026 passed by the first respondent (Deputy Inspector General of Registration, Chennai Zone) confirming the order of the second respondent and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Section 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act, 1899, Tamil Nadu Stamp Rules and Article 14 of the Constitution of India and consequently, directing the respondents to accept the valuation adopted by the petitioner at Rs.236/- per sq.ft. that the subject property admeasuring Acres 10.91 cents comprised in Survey Nos.33/1C, 33/2D, 33/2C, 34/1C, 34/2, 35/1C, 35/2, 36, 37, 39, 40, 41/1, 41/2A, 41/3, 41/4, 43/1, 43/2, 44/1 and 44/2 situated at Sinthalakuppam Village, Gummidipoondi Taluk, Tiruvallur District is liable to be valued in accordance with its existing classification and prevailing guideline value as on the date of execution of the Sale Deed dated 11.08.2025 (Doc.No.4694/2025) and release the Sale Deed dated 11.08.2025 in Doc No.4694/2025 to the petitioner forthwith.

For Petitioner : Mr.Ashutosh Kumar Shukla For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan, Special Government Pleader *****

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned orders passed by the respective respondents refusing to release the sale deed presented by the petitioner for registration on the ground of improper valuation.

2. According to the respondents, the property, which is the subject matter of sale deed, falls under industrial zone, whereas, it is the case of the petitioner that it is a residential property. Aggrieved by the order of the second respondent, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the first respondent. The contentions of the petitioner have been rejected by both the respondents.

3. Admittedly, the document viz., sale deed was not referred to the Collector as per the provisions of Section 47-A of the Stamp Act by the concerned Sub-Registrar.

4. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents would now submit, on instructions, that uninfluenced by any of the observations made in the impugned orders, the Collector, exercising his power under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act, shall adjudicate the valuation dispute within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

5. No prejudice would be caused to any other parties, if the matter is referred to the Collector under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act for proper adjudication of the valuation of the property.

6. This Court is not expressing any opinion on the merits of the respective contentions as it is left open for the Collector exercising powers under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act to decide.

7. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the concerned Collector exercising powers under Section 47-A of the Stamp Act to adjud

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