ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021, Revision Petition on Pending Document P1/2015, 18 September 2024
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings No. ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021 on 18 September 2024, allowing a revision petition concerning a consent deed pending as P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub-Registrar Office. The proceedings classify the consent deed as an ancillary instrument under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act and set aside the Sivaganga District Registrar's decision treating it as a conveyance and demanding deficit stamp duty and a penalty.
What the proceedings decide
Proceedings No. ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021, issued by the Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority on 18 September 2024, concern a consent deed pending as document P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub-Registrar Office in the Sivaganga registration district. The revision petition was accepted, and the Sivaganga District Registrar's order dated 29 January 2021 was set aside.
The consent deed was classified as an ancillary instrument under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act, rather than as a conveyance under section 23.
Background of the document
The proceedings record the following details:
- The consent deed was executed on 31 December 2014 by T. Marimuthu in favour of Govindaraj.
- The stated property value was ₹42,770, based on earlier sale document 1833/2011.
- The consent deed carried stamp duty of ₹20.
- The District Registrar had treated it as a conveyance and assessed deficit stamp duty of ₹79,352 and a penalty of ₹1,648.
- The property had belonged ancestrally to T. Marimuthu and his brother Shanmugam.
- Shanmugam had given a general power to his wife, Maruthambal, who sold the property to Govindaraj through document 1833/2011.
- Marimuthu later executed the consent deed without receiving any consideration because he had been away when the sale document was registered.
Reason for allowing the revision
Proceedings No. ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021 apply section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act, which addresses multiple instruments used to complete one sale, mortgage or settlement transaction. Under the provision quoted in the proceedings, the principal instrument bears the prescribed duty, while another instrument used to complete the same transaction bears duty of five rupees.
The authority found that the consent deed completed the earlier sale transaction and was therefore an ancillary instrument. The proceedings also refer to earlier Registration Department decisions that treated similar consent deeds as ancillary instruments under section 4.
Who is affected
Proceedings No. ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021 directly affect the parties to pending document P1/2015 and the Sivaganga District Registrar. The reasoning is also relevant to buyers, owners and registration professionals examining whether a later consent deed merely completes an earlier sale or independently transfers property rights.
This summary is generated from the source document to help you find what is relevant. The PDF above is authoritative. For advice on your own property, use LandLens One or speak to a qualified professional.
Common questions
Was the consent deed treated as a fresh sale deed?
No. The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority treated it as an ancillary instrument under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act.
Was the deficit stamp duty and penalty demand upheld?
No. Proceedings No. ப.மு.11514/ப்பி1/2021 set aside the District Registrar's decision, which had assessed deficit stamp duty of ₹79,352 and a penalty of ₹1,648.
Why was the consent deed considered ancillary to the earlier sale?
The authority found that the consent deed was executed to complete the transaction under sale document 1833/2011. It recorded that Marimuthu gave consent without receiving any consideration because he had not joined in the earlier sale document.
Does the decision concern every consent deed registered in Tamil Nadu?
The proceedings decide the revision relating to pending document P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub-Registrar Office. They also refer to earlier Registration Department decisions treating similar consent documents as ancillary instruments under section 4.
