← Library
Madras High CourtCMA/1951/2005dismissed

Ramalingana Venkatesamuthy v. The Tamil Nadu

2025-03-28Honourable Mr Justice S. Sounthar4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 28.03.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR 1.Ramalingana Venkatesamurthy 2.V.Gnana Thenmozhi (rep. by their power agent Mrs.C.Ezhilarasi) No.7, Ramakrishnan Street, Porur, Chennai - 600 106 ... Appellants vs.

1.The Tamilnadu Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Cum Inspector General of Registration Santhome Chennai - 600 028 2.The District Registrar cum District Collector Stamps Villivakkam Chennai - 600 101 3.The Sub Registrar Villivakkam ... Respondents PRAYER: Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is filed under Section 47 (A) (10) of Indian Stamp Act, to set aside the order of the first respondent in PA.MU.Lr.No.62723 / PP.1 / 2003 dated 29-01-2005 confirming the order of the second respondent in P. No.94/2, dated 03-09-2003 and direct the respondents to return the original deed registered as P.No. 94/2002 dated 26-04-2002, Sub-Registrar Office, Villivakkam to the appellants herein. For Appellants : Mr.L.Dhamodaran 1/4

For Respondents : Mr.C.Sathish Government Advocate

J U D G M E N T

The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal has been filed challenging the order passed by the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration under Section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act.

2. The 2nd respondent herein passed an order under Section 40(1)(b) of the Indian Stamp Act directing the Power Agent of 2nd appellant to pay deficit stamp duty together with penalty. The said order was challenged by the appellants by filing appeal before the Inspector General of Registration under Section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act. The said appeal was dismissed by confirming the order passed by the 2nd respondent.

3. From the order passed by the Inspector General of Registration under Section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act, no appeal is provided to the High Court. Therefore, the instant civil miscellaneous appeal filed by the appellants is not maintainable.

4. Infact, in P.Sridhar vs. The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector General of Registration and others in C.M.A.No.775 of 2020, dated 18.03.2021, this Court has taken a similar view. 2/4

5. In view of the same, the Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is dismissed as not maintainable with liberty to the appellants to challenge the order passed by the Chief Revenue Controlling Authority-cum-Inspector General of Registration in the manner known to law. No costs. 28.03.2025 Index :Yes/No Speaking order :Yes/No :Yes/No dm Note:-The Registry is directed to return the original impugned order to the learned counsel for the appellants, after getting necessary endorsement. To 1.The Tamilnadu Chief Revenue Controlling Authority Cum Inspector General of Registration Santhome, Chennai - 600 028 2.The District Registrar cum District Collector Stamps Villivakkam, Chennai - 600 101 3.The Sub Registrar, Villivakkam 4.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras.

3/4

S.SOUNTHAR, J.

dm C.M.A.No.1951 of 2005 28.03.2025 4/4