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) 35615

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
ABDUL QUDDHOSE, J
PVS Granites Represented by its Partner, Mr.Vinodkumar S. – Appellant
Versus
The Additional Chief Secretary (FAC), Natural Resources Department – Respondent
W.M.P.No.16473 of 2026



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.M.V.Bhaskar
For the Respondents:Ms.A.Bakkiyalakhmi Government Advocate

No additional stamp duty required for supplementary lease deed on transfer of unextended balance lease period; registration subject to reasoned decision.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus under Article 226 to direct registration of a supplementary lease deed without additional stamp duty, following prior lease transfer permission. Facts involve a 20-year lease from 14.03.2022 transferred before expiry, necessitating the supplementary deed dated 05.02.2026. Court finds no prejudice to respondents and directs document presentation and decision-making. Issue framed as whether additional stamp duty is required for registering the supplementary lease deed for the balance unextended period. Ratio decidendi emphasizes consideration of petitioner's contentions on no extension of original lease term, with directions for timely decision and speaking order if refused. Writ petition disposed with directions to present deed within one week and third respondent to decide within three weeks; no costs.

Table of Content
1. petition challenges insistence on additional stamp duty for supplementary lease deed. (Para 1 , 2)
2. respondents confirm non-presentation; petitioner undertakes to present deed. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court directs presentation and reasoned registration decision within timelines. (Para 5 , 6)

ORDER

This writ petition has been filed seeking for a direction to the third respondent to receive and register the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 to be presented by the petitioner for registration without insisting upon any additional stamp duty as per the proceedings of the second respondent dated 05.02.2026.

2. According to the petitioner, earlier M/s.Sri Vari Granites had registered a lease deed on 14.03.2022 for a period of twenty years. According to the petitioner, even before the expiry of the said lease, M/s.Sri Vari Granites had transferred the lease in favour of the petitioner with respect to the balance period. There became a necessity for execution of the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 between the petitioner, M/s.Sri Vari Granites and the second respondent. According to the petitioner, permission was also granted to the petitioner for transfer of lease in favour of the petitioner by M/s.Sri Vari Granites through the proceedings of the second respondent dated 05.02.2026. However, according to the petitioner, the third respondent is refusing to receive and register the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 and is insisting upon payment of additional stamp duty. According to the petitioner, since the original lease period has not been extended, there is no necessity for the petitioner to pay additional stamp duty for the balance period on the transfer of lease in favour of the petitioner by M/s.Sri Vari Granites.

3. Ms.A.Bakkiyalakhmi, learned Government Advocate, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. Learned Government Advocate would submit, on instructions, that till date, the petitioner has not presented the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 with the third respondent for registration.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, would submit that the petitioner is willing to present the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 for registration with the third respondent within a time frame to be fixed by this Court and the undertaking given by the petitioner is recorded by this Court.

5. No prejudice would be caused to the respondents if the petitioner is directed to present the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 for registration with the third respondent and a direction is issued to the third respondent to take a final decision as to whether the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 presented by the petitioner can be registered or not after giving due consideration to the contentions of the petitioner raised in this writ petition within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

6. Accordingly, this Court directs the petitioner to present the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 for registration with the third respondent within a period of one (1) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On presentation of the same by the petitioner within the stipulated time, the third respondent shall, after giving due consideration to the contentions raised in this writ petition, take a final decision as to whether the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 can be registered or not without payment of additional stamp duty as per the proceedings of the second respondent dated 05.02.2026 within a period of three (3) weeks thereafter. In case, the third respondent decides to refuse registration of the supplementary lease deed dated 05.02.2026 presented by the petitioner for registration and still insist upon payment of additional stamp duty, the third respondent shall pass a speaking order with regard to the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition.

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