Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

Vijay Venkataswamy vs The Sub Registrar on 11 August, 2021

Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan

Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan

                                                                        W.P.No.14599 of 2011

                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                    DATED: 11.08.2021

                                                         CORAM:

                               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

                                                W.P.No.14599 of 2011
                                                and M.P.No.1 of 2011

                     1.Vijay Venkataswamy
                     2.V.Balaji
                     3.B.Lakshmi Narayana
                     4.Minor L.Anvitha
                       Rep. by natural guardian father
                       B.Lakshmi Narayana
                     5.V.Vasanthamani
                     6.V.Rajakumar
                     7.R.Nivedita
                       Rep by her Power Agent,
                       V.Rajakumar
                     8.V.Muralidharan
                     9.Minor M.Akshay
                     10.Minor M.Mrithyunjay
                     11.Manickammal
                     12.Santha Thiagarajan
                     13.Dheena Ranganathan
                     14.Padmalochana
                     15.Sakunthala Mohandas                                ... Petitioners

                                                           Vs

                     1.The Sub Registrar,
                       (District Registrar Cadre)
                       Singanallur,
                       Coimbatore.

                     1/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
                                                                                        W.P.No.14599 of 2011



                     2.The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority &
                       Inspector General of Registration,
                       Chennai - 600 028.                                                ... Respondents




                     Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, to

                     issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd

                     respondent dated 26.02.2011 vide D.Dis.No.26597/P1/2007 and quash the

                     same and consequently direct the 1st respondent to register the

                     Collaboration agreement dated 20.12.2006 submitted by the petitioners.



                                         For Petitioner     : M/s.Chitra Sampath, Senior Counsel
                                                              for Mr.T.S.Baskaran

                                         For Respondents : Mr.Richardson Wilson,
                                                           Government Advocate

                                                            **********


                                                             ORDER

This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 2nd respondent dated 26.02.2011 vide D.Dis.No.26597/P1/2007 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.14599 of 2011 1st respondent to register the Collaboration agreement dated 20.12.2006 submitted by the petitioners.

2. The learned senior counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are the absolute owners of the subject property. They intend to develop the same and entered into a Collaboration Agreement dated 20.12.2006 with M/s.Orchid Infrastructure Developers (Private) Limited for developing our lands. The said agreement was presented for registration. However, the first respondent is directed to pay deficit stamp duty at Rs.2,11,90,244/-.

3. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners preferred revision before the second respondent. Though the second respondent accept the contention of the petitioners, invented new law and treated the said Collaboration Agreement as mortgagee and directed the petitioners to pay the stamp duty at 4% for the market value of 65% of the subject property chargeable under Article 40(a) of the Indian Stamp Act. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.14599 of 2011

4. Now the matter has been settled between the petitioners and the developers before the Arbitrator and the petitioners also returned the entire amount to the builder which was received as Security Deposit. Therefore, the first respondent is directed to return the Collaboration Agreement dated 20.12.2006 to the petitioner, which was presented for registration.

5. With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No order as to costs.

11.08.2021 Internet:Yes Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non speaking order rna To

1.The Sub Registrar, (District Registrar Cadre) Singanallur, Coimbatore.

2.The Chief Controlling Revenue Authority & Inspector General of Registration, Chennai - 600 028.

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/ W.P.No.14599 of 2011 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, rna W.P.No.14599 of 2011 and M.P.No.1 of 2011 11.08.2021 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/