Mr.Mohammed S.Lehry v. The District Revenue Officer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.02.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI W.P.No.22792 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1, 2 & 3 of 2014 Mr.Mohammed S.Lehry
...Petitioner
Vs.
1.
The District Revenue Officer (Stamps), Collector Office, Chennai-1.
2.
The Tahsildar, 46, Chamiers Road, R.A.Puram, Chennai-600 028.
3.
The Sub Registrar, North Chennai, Rajaji Salai, Chennai.
...Respondents
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the second respondent herein dated 26.11.2008 and quash the same and direct the respondents herein to issue from II to make final assessment order in respect of the sale deed dated 13.05.2002 registered as document in 155 of 2002. For Petitioner : Mr.Samir Shah for M/s. Shah and Shah For Respondents R1 & R3 : Mr.T.Chezhiyan Additional Government Pleader For Respondent R2 : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan Special Government Pleader
O R D E R
The petitioner filed this writ petition seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of the 2nd respondent dated 26.11.2008 and quash the same and consequently to direct the respondents herein to issue form II to make final assessment order in respect of the sale deed dated 13.05.2002 registered as Document in 155 of 2002.
2. The case of the petitioner is that, he purchased an immovable property at Door No.51/3, Old No.25/3, Armenian Street, George Town, Chennai-1 for a total consideration of Rs.15,00,000/- and the sale deed was executed in favour of the petitioner. After paying the necessary stamp duty and registration fee, the document was presented for registration before the Sub Registrar and the same was registered and assigned number as Document No.155 of 2002. After registration, the Sub-registrar referred the said document under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act to determine the deficit Stamp duty of the said property. While so, the petitioner received a notice dated 05.07.2002 from the 1st respondent, directing the petitioner to represent the matter before the Collector. Therefore, the petitioner approached the 1st respondent and submitted a letter. Thereafter, the petitioner received another notice dated 20.02.2003, stating that the land value has been fixed at Rs.3,475/- and accordingly demand is made for further payment of Rs.4,59,992/-.
3. Aggrieved by the said exorbitant demand, the petitioner and his family members filed W.P.Nos.20616 & 20640 of 2007 and the same were allowed by a common order dated 22.03.2010 and notice dated 21.02.2007 issued by the 2nd respondent was declared as illegal and the 1st respondent was directed to serve Form II and final assessment order. Pursuant to the order of this Court, Form II notice was issued to one Master Irfan A. Lehry and Mrs. Yasmin A. Lehry in respect of Document Nos.157 and 158 of 2002 and subsequently final assessment orders were also passed, however, the said procedure was not adopted so far as the petitioner is concerned. The petitioner received a notice dated 26.11.2008 from the 2nd respondent, stating that an amount of Rs.4,59,992/- was due from the petitioner with interest at 2% per month from 21.04.2003.
While such being the case, the 2nd respondent went to petitioner's shop and threatened the Manager and collected a sum of Rs.4,59,992/- on 31.01.2009. Even on receipt of the said amount, the 1st respondent has not released the document / sale deed in favour of the petitioner. Hence, challenging the demand notice dated 26.11.2008, the present Writ petition is filed.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that, the 1st respondent has failed to serve the final assessment order upon the petitioner, due to which the petitioner was unable to file appeal against the same. He further submits that the 3rd respondent is demanding the petitioner to pay the exorbitant interest at the rate of 24% per annum from 21.04.2003 which is against the provisions of the Act and also the order was passed without hearing the petitioner. Hence, he prays that this Court may quash the impugned notice dated 26.11.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent and consequently direct the respondents to
issue Form II in order to make final assessment order in respect of the sale deed dated 13.05.2002 registered as Document in 155 of 2002.
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the 2nd respondent submitted that, though the petitioner paid a sum of Rs.4,59,992/- on 31.01.2009, the present demand is with regard to the interest of 2% for the period of 2003-2009, where the petitioner has not paid the outstanding amount and the notice was issued by the 1st respondent on 20.02.2003 and the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs.4,59,992/- without interest of 2% and the petitioner has to pay interest of 2% per month till the realisation of the demand amount
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that, the petitioner is ready to deposit the interest at 2% per month.
7. Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the materials available on record.
8. Facts in the present case are not in dispute. Admittedly, the petitioner purchased the said property for a total consideration of Rs.15,00,000/- and the same was registered in Document No.155 of 2002. Thereafter, the 3rd respondent referred the matter to the 1st respondent under Section 47-A of the Indian Stamp Act and the 1st respondent issued notice dated 20.02.2003, and demanded the petitioner to make a further payment of Rs.4,59,992/-. However, the said order was not challenged before any forum including The Inspector General of Registration and the petitioner has not filed any Writ petition challenging the demand notice dated 20.02.2003. Further, the decision in respect of W.P.Nos.20616 and 20640 of 2007 is not applicable to the petitioner, as it is only with regard to the Documents Nos.157 and 158 of 2002, whereas the petitioner's Document number is 155, which was not dealt with in the above said Writ petition.
9. Further, a perusal of Section 47-A (4) of the Indian Stamp Act makes it clear that Every person liable to pay the difference in the amount of duty under sub-section (2) of subsection (3) shall, pay such duty within such period as may be prescribed. In default of such payment, such amount of duty outstanding on the date of default shall be a charge on the property affected in such instrument. On any amount remaining unpaid after the date specified for its payment, the person liable to pay the duty shall pay, in addition to the amount due, interest at two percent per month on such amount for the entire period of default. Admittedly, the 1st respondent made a demand on 20.02.2003 and the petitioner paid the amount on 31.01.2009 i.e.,Rs.4,59,992/- without the interest of 2% per month and the petitioner has also not challenged the said demand notice before
any other forum. Hence, challenging the subsequent demand notice dated 26.11.2008 is not sustainable one. Hence, this Court is not inclined to interfere with the impugned order.
10. However, the petitioner is at liberty to pay the interest of 2% per month from 21.04.2003 to 31.01.2009 alone for the amount of Rs.4,59,992/- within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which the 2nd respondent is directed to proceed with the matter in accordance with law. On receipt of the interest amount, the respondents are directed to release the documents / sale deed in favour of the petitioner.
11. This Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid direction. No cost. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS IX) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar skt To 1.
The District Revenue Officer (Stamps), Collector Office, Chennai-1.
2.
The Tahsildar, 46, Chamiers Road, R.A.Puram, Chennai-600 028.
3.
The Sub Registrar, North Chennai, Rajaji Salai, Chennai.
+1 cc to Government Pleader Sr.NO. 8324,8349 W.P.No.22792 of 2014 and M.P.Nos.1, 2 & 3 of 2014 mt(CO) A.SK(30/03/2022)