T.D. Rajasekaran v. The Inspector General, Department of Registration, Chennai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDate:- 03.09.2009CoramThe Honourable Mr. Justice P. JYOTHIMANIW.P. Nos.17951 and 17952 of 2009andM.P. Nos.1 + 1 of 2009 T.D. Rajasekaran... Petitioner in both W.Ps...Vs..1. The Inspector General, Department of Registration, Chennai.2. The District Collector, Thiruvallur.3. The District Revenue Officer(Stamp Duty), O/o. The District Collector, Chennai – 1.4. The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.5. The Sub Registrar, O/o. the Sub Registrar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.... Respondents in both W.Ps.Writ Petitions under Article 226 of The Constitution ofIndia, praying to issue a writ of certiorari, to call for the recordson the file of the third respondent herein in Na.Ka.Si.Pa.Nos.305 and4863/95 dated 30.10.2001 and subsequently confirmed by the firstrespondent herein in Mu.Mu.Nos.1650 and 16489/N1/09 dated 28.5.2009and quash the same.For Petitioner : Mr. G. KarthikeyanFor Respondents : Mr. V. Arun, Additional Government Pleader https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ O R D E RIn respect of the sale deeds executed on 23.3.1994 and15.3.1995 respectively by which the petitioner purchased the landsfor a sale consideration of Rs.25,000/- each, the proceedings underSection 47(A) of the Indian Stamp Act (hereinafter referred to as"the Act") was initiated by the Registering Authority, 5th respondentherein on the ground that there was a suspicion about under-valuationof the property, by referring the same to the thirdrespondent/District Revenue Officer (Stamp Duty). 2. It appears that the third respondent has passed an orderon 30.10.2001 under Section 47(A)(1) of the Act, directing thepetitioner to pay the deficit stamp duty of Rs.66,024/- andRs.94,440/- respectively. The grievance of the petitioner was thatno notice was served on the petitioner in Form No.1 before the thirdrespondent proceeded with the enquiry under Section 47(A)(1) of theAct and a copy of the order dated 30.10.2001 passed by the thirdrespondent was also not communicated to him. 3. However, sometimes, in the year 2003, there was adistraint proceedings initiated by the Tahsildar. As against thesaid distraint notice dated 23.10.2003, the petitioner has moved thisCourt by way of filing W.P. Nos.35247 and 35248 of 2003 andthereafter, it was informed that the aforesaid order under Section47A of the Act came to be passed on 30.10.2001 itself. In thosecircumstances, this Court, while disposing of the said writ petitionsby an order dated 11.2.2008, set aside the distraint proceedings anddirected the respondents to communicate the order passed by the thirdrespondent under Section 47A of the Act and thereafter giving libertyto the petitioner to challenge the said order in the manner known tolaw.4. After the said order was passed by this Court, thepetitioner, by a notice dated 3.4.2008, addressed to the DistrictRevenue Officer (Stamp Duty), has requested the third respondent tocommunicate the copy of the order. It is stated that the order copywas ultimately communicated by the third respondent on 7.2.2009, thatis evidenced by a covering letter of the third respondent, DistrictRevenue Officer (Stamp Duty) addressed to the petitioner on30.1.2009, enclosing a copy of the notice dated 30.10.2001. 5. After receipt of the said notice, the petitioner hasfiled an appeal before the first respondent, who is the ChiefControlling Revenue Authority, under Section 47A of the Act on26.3.2009 and that the said appeal has been filed within two monthsfrom the date of communication of the order of the third respondentdated 30.1.2009. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

6. The first respondent, being the Appellate Authority,passed the impugned order, rejecting the appeal on two grounds viz.the appeal has been filed seven years after the original order waspassed by the third respondent and that the appeal has not been filedin the proper form as required under Rule 9 of the Tamil Nadu Stamp(Prevention of Undervaluation of Instruments) Rules, 1968(hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") in the sense that theoriginal or certified copy of the order appealed against has not beenenclosed and the appeal has not been filed in the format prescribedin the Rules. 7. On a reference to the appeal stated to have been filedby the petitioner, it is seen that in the appeal, while thepetitioner has raised all the points on merit in respect of thealleged under-valuation, the fact remains that the appeal has notbeen filed in the proper form. Rule 9(2) and (3) of the Rulescontemplates the particulars to be furnished in the appeal, which areas follows:-"9(2) An appeal shall be made in duplicate andshall contain the following particulars namely:-(a) full name, father's name or husband'sname, occupation and address of the appellant: (b) full name, father's name or husband'sname, occupation and address of every personexecuting the instrument;(c) full name, father's name or husband'sname, occupation and address of every personclaiming under the instrument;(d) date and nature of the instrument;(e) registration number, date of registrationand name of office where the instrument wasregistered;(f) name of town or village in which theproperty is situated together with the name of thetaluk and the registration sub-districts;(g) number and date of the Collector's orderwhich is appealed against;(h) market value of the property as set forthin the instrument; https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (i) market value of the property asdetermined by the Collector.(3) Every appeal shall be accompanied by:--(a) the original or certified copy of theorder appealed against;(b) the original or a certified copy of theinstrument; and(c) memo of grounds of appeal."8. The first reason given by the first respondent in theimpugned order that the appeal has been filed seven years after theorder passed by the third respondent is liable to be rejected on theface of it. It is the complaint of the petitioner that even underSection 47A(1) enquiry at the instance of the fifth respondent, therewas no notice served on him and ultimately, though an order came tobe passed by the third respondent on 30.10.2001, the same has notbeen communicated to him. 9. Rule 15 of the Rules contemplates that any notice ororders passed by the Authorities under the Act are to be served onthe party concerned and the manner of service is also stated in thesaid Rule. It is stated that in cases where the party is individualor individual persons, the service is to be effected either bydelivery or tendering the notice or order to the person concerned orhis counsel or authorised agent or to some adult member of the familyor to the person concerned by registered post acknowledgement due orif none of the aforesaid modes of service is practicable, by affixingthe notice or order in some conspicuous part of the last known placeof residence or business of the person concerned. 10. But, there is nothing on record to show that the thirdrespondent, while passing the earlier order dated 30.10.2001 underSection 47A(1) of the Act, has followed anyone of the procedure inserving the said order. It was only after the distraint notice waspassed by the Tahsildar for recovery of amount under the RevenueRecovery Act on 23.10.2003, the petitioner appears to have knownabout the order of the third respondent dated 30.10.2001 and he hasapproached this Court by way of filing writ petitions in W.P.Nos.35247 and 35248 of 2003 and the same have been taken nearly fiveyears for final decision and ultimately, by an order dated 11.2.2008,this Court has allowed the writ petitions by setting aside thedistraint order with a direction to the Revenue Authorities tocommunicate the copy of the order dated 30.10.2001. In spite of thesaid order of this Court, the order of the third respondent came tobe communicated to the petitioner only on 7.2.2009 and thereafter,the appeal was filed before the first respondent within sixty days https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ i.e. on 26.3.2009. In such view of the matter, the first reasongiven in the impugned order that the appeal is filed after sevenyears is to be rejected.11. The second reason given in the impugned order is thatRule 9(2) of the Rules has not been followed. It is true that thecontents of the 9(2) of the Rules are to be followed, by filing theappeal in proper form. But, the fact remains that the purpose of theappeal under Section 47A of the Act by empowering the ChiefControlling Authority is to decide as to whether there has been anyunder-valuation in respect of the property or not. When that is thebasic objection, because the appeal is not filed in the proper form,that itself cannot be a ground for rejecting the appeal totally. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the delayhaving been caused not due to the conduct of the petitioner, but dueto the conduct of the Authorities, who have not followed theconditions prescribed under the Act, I am of the considered view thatthe reasons assigned by the first respondent in the impugned ordercannot be sustained and the technicality cannot stand in the way ofgranting substantial justice to the party.13. In such view of the matter, the impugned order passedby the first respondent dated 28.5.2009 is set aside and the matteris remanded back to the first respondent to consider the appeal filedby the petitioner on 26.3.2009 and pass appropriate orders on meritand in accordance with law. It is made clear that the petitionershall enclose the particulars as required under Rule 9(2) and (3) ofthe Rules and send to the first respondent-Appellate authority inaddition to the representation, which has already been sent to him on26.3.2009 within a period of one week from the date of receipt of acopy of this order and thereafter, the first respondent is directedto pass orders on merits and in accordance with law expeditiously inany event within a period of twelve weeks thereafter. The writpetitions are allowed. Consequently, the connected M.Ps. are closed.No costs.Sd/-Asst.Registrar/True Copy/Sub.Asst.Registrarssa.To1. The Inspector General, Department of Registration, Chennai. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. The District Collector, Thiruvallur.3. The District Revenue Officer(Stamp Duty), O/o. The District Collector, Chennai – 1.4. The Tahsildar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.5. The Sub Registrar, O/o. the Sub Registrar, Poonamallee Taluk, Thiruvallur District.+ 1 cc to Mr.G.Karthikeyan,Advocate,SR.13452W.P. Nos.17951 and17952 of 2009 andconnected M.Ps.TEJ(CO)EM/7.9.09