Madras High Court
M/S.Indus Developers vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 28 April, 2025
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28.04.2025
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025
in W.P.No.10454 of 2024
M/s.Indus Developers,
Rep. by its Authorised Signatory,
Mr.Ajay Kumar Lunawath,
S/o.Mr.Megharaj Lunawath,
Having Office at No.5C, EGA,
Trade Centre, No.809, P.H.Road,
Kilpauk, Chennai-600 010. ... Petitioner/Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Inspector General of Registration,
100, Santhome High Road,
Chennai-600 028.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Mylapore Sub Registrar Office,
No.9, Kavignar Bharathidasan Road,
Seethamma Colony, MIG Colony,
Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018.
3. The Authorised Officer,
Aditya Birla Finance Limited,
Having Office at Unit No.10 & 12,
6th & 4th Floor, Oval Venkat Narayana Road,
T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. ... Respondents/Respondents
For Petitioner : Mr.J.D.Srikanth Varma
For Respondents : Mr.K.Karthick Jeganath
Govt. Advocate
*****
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm )
W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025
ORDER
The present Miscellaneous Petition has been filed to clarify the order dated 23.07.2024 and to direct the 2nd respondent not to insist the stamp duty and registering fee to the petitioner, when the same is presented for registration for sale of the property based on the sale certificate.
2. The Writ Petition in W.P.No.10454 of 2024 has been filed for a direction to the 2nd respondent to accept the sale deed presented for registration without insisting for stamp duty and registering fee from the petitioner.
3. The Hon'ble brother Judge Justice N.Anand Venkatesh, taking note of the fact that in a batch of Writ Petitions disposed of by me in M/s.Sri Balaji Fibre's case dated 23.07.2024 (W.P.Nos.3696 of 2023, etc. batch), various directions have been given with regard to the stamp duty, observed that unless and otherwise Paragraph No.74(v) of the order dated 23.07.2024 is clarified by the very same Judge this Court, no contra direction can be issued by the Court. Therefore, liberty was also given to the petitioner to move this Court.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in Sri Balaji Fibre's case, this Court had directed the respondents to enter the sale certificate in Book-I 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act without insisting for registration fee. When the petitioner intended to sell the property, the respondents tried to initiate proceedings to impound the sale certificate. According to him, G.O.Ms.No.28 dated 23.03.2023 has been stayed by this Court and therefore, the Authorities concerned cannot impound the sale certificate.
5. To be more precise, G.O.Ms.No.28 dated 23.03.2023 had been issued by the Government, in which, fee has been enhanced for filing a sale certificate under sub-section (2) or sub-section (4) of Section 89 of the Act to the tune of Rupees eleven for every Rupees hundred or part thereof on the market value of the property. The said Government Order has been brought by the Government with an intention to collect registration fee or stamp duty for filing a sale certificate.
6. It is not in dispute as to the stay of G.O.Ms.No.28 dated 23.03.2023. It is relevant to note that the filing of sale certificate in fact does not amount to registration of the sale certificate, as registration of the sale certificate is a different act. There is a statutory duty cast upon the Registering Authority in respect of filing of sale certificate as mandated under Section 89 of the Act. Whenever a Revenue Officer grants a certificate of the sale to the purchaser of immovable property, Law mandates that a copy of such sale certificate shall be entered in Book No. 1 under 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 Section 89(4) of the Act. For filing a copy of the sale certificate, in fact there is no stamp duty required, but however the Government Order has been issued.
7. Be that as it may, this Court, after considering various decisions and the entire proceedings, passed the following orders:
(i) the sale certificate will not come under the purview of conveyance, since, it is not a transfer inter vivos, it is a transfer by operation of law.
(ii) Section 47-A of the Stamp Act cannot be invoked for the sale certificate presented for registration by the parties.
(iii) surcharge or transfer duty will not be payable for sale certificate when presented for registration.
(iv) mere filing the copy of the sale certificate forwarded by the authorised officer under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act will not require any stamp duty.
(v) If the party seeks to use the sale certificate for any purpose and produced before the authorities mentioned under Sections 33 and 35 of the Indian Stamp Act, such sale certificate is amenable for impounding at the discretion of the authorities.
8. This Court also observed that the levy of transfer duty on the sale certificate cannot be sustained in the eye of law and the stamp duty leviable is only 5% on the purchase money apart from 1 % of registration charges. It was further clear that when a party seeks to use sale certificate for any other purpose, it requires 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 stamp duty. If not duly stamped, it is amenable for impounding by the authorities concerned.
9. Insofar as payment of stamp duty is concerned, similar view has been taken by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Inspector General of Registration, Mylapore, Chennai and another vs. Trinity Colour India (P) Limited, Erode [W.A.No. 1606 of 2021] decided on 01.08.2024. It is brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Government Advocate that against the order of the Division Bench, an appeal has been preferred before the Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.29105 of 2024, but, however no stay has been granted by the Apex Court.
10. Be that as it may, this Court holds that to use the sale certificate for any other purpose, it has to be stamped properly. It is pertinent to mention here that the same view has been taken by the Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab and another vs. Ferrous Alloy Forgings P. Ltd. and others, reported in 2024 SCC OnLine SC 337, wherein in Paragraph No.20, it has been held as follows:
“20. The position of law discussed above makes it clear that sale certificate issued by the authorised officer is not compulsorily registrable. Mere filing under Section 89(4) of the Registration Act itself is sufficient when a copy of the sale certificate is forwarded by the authorised officer to the registering authority. However, a perusal of Articles 18 and 23 respectively of the first schedule to the Stamp 5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 Act respectively makes it clear that when the auction purchaser presents the original sale certificate for registration, it would attract stamp duty in accordance with the said Articles. As long as the sale certificate remains as it is, it is not compulsorily registrable. It is only when the auction purchaser uses the certificate for some other purpose that the requirement of payment of stamp duty, etc. would arise.
11. From the above proposition, it is clear that to use the sale certificate for any other purpose, stamp duty is absolutely necessary. In such view of the matter, as the Court already held that the stamp duty leviable is only 5% on the purchase money apart from 1 % of registration charges, there is no bar for the respondents to collect the stamp duty at the rate of 5% on the purchase money apart from 1 % of registration charges. However, it is made clear that in case the Apex Court takes a different view that surcharge or transfer duty will be payable for sale certificate when presented for registration, in that case, the petitioner is liable to pay the additional amount, if any.
12. At this juncture, it is brought to the notice of this Court that when Doc.No.25 of 2024 dated 17.12.2024 was presented for registration, the Registering Authority insisted for payment of registration charges and stamp duty (11%) towards the sale certificate as per the entry made in the certificate. The respondents are directed to remove such entry from the Document immediately on payment of 5% stamp duty + 1% Registration fee by the petitioner.
6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025
13. This Miscellaneous Petition for clarification is disposed of accordingly.
28.04.2025 ar Note: Issue order copy on 30.04.2025 To:
1. The Inspector General of Registration, 100, Santhome High Road, Chennai-600 028.
2. The Sub-Registrar, Mylapore Sub Registrar Office, No.9, Kavignar Bharathidasan Road, Seethamma Colony, MIG Colony, Alwarpet, Chennai-600 018.
3. The Authorised Officer, Aditya Birla Finance Limited, Having Office at Unit No.10 & 12, 6th & 4th Floor, Oval Venkat Narayana Road, T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017.7/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm ) W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 N.SATHISH KUMAR,J., ar W.M.P.No.15245 of 2025 in W.P.No.10454 of 2024 28.04.2025 8/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 30/04/2025 10:47:36 pm )