Mr. Antony Dominic, J.

1. Ext.P1 is a sale deed in which the petitioner is the Vendor. By this document, what was conveyed is Flat No.I-11 of the apartment complex by name "Jewel Lexington". The flat number indicated in the document is I-1. Further, there was also a mistake committed in the Pan number of the vendor. For correcting the aforesaid two mistakes, the parties to Ext.P1 executed Ext.P2 rectification deed. According to the petitioner, Ext.P2 document was presented for adjudication before the 1st respondent in terms of Section 31 of the Kerala Stamp Act. On adjudication, the 1st respondent has issued Ext.P3 taking the view that Ext.P2 for all purposes should be treated as a sale deed. It is challenging Ext.P3, this writ petition is filed.

2. View taken in Ext.P3 is that, since in Ext.P1 the property sold is Flat No.I-1 and as what is now conveyed is Flat No.I-11, in the process of rectification what is really taken place is extinguishment of right in respect of one and creation of right in respect of another. It is therefore that, the 1st respondent has held that what is to be executed should be a sale deed.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and