Review Order on Paramakudi Consent Deed P1/2015
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings No. 11514/P1/2021 on 18 September 2024, allowing a review petition concerning consent deed P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub Registrar Office. The proceedings classify the consent deed as an ancillary document under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act and set aside the Sivaganga District Registrar's order demanding deficit stamp duty and a penalty.
What the proceedings decide
Proceedings No. 11514/P1/2021 of the Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority concern a consent deed dated 31 December 2014. The deed was kept pending as P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub Registrar Office in the Sivaganga Registration District.
The authority decided that the consent deed completed an earlier sale transaction and should be treated as an ancillary document under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act. The review petition was accepted, and the Sivaganga District Registrar's order dated 29 January 2021 was set aside.
Background of the property transaction
The proceedings record the following facts:
- The property was ancestrally owned by T. Marimuthu and his brother Shanmugam.
- Shanmugam gave a general power of attorney over the whole property to his wife, Maruthambal, through document 126/2002.
- Maruthambal sold the property to Govindaraj through document 1833/2011.
- Marimuthu was away when that sale deed was registered. He later executed the consent deed without receiving any further consideration.
- The property value recorded in the earlier sale deed was Rs.42,770.
Stamp duty dispute
The consent deed carried stamp duty of Rs.20. The Sivaganga District Registrar treated it as a sale document under Article 23 of the Indian Stamp Act, reasoning that Marimuthu's undivided half share passed through the consent deed. The District Registrar demanded deficit stamp duty of Rs.79,352 and a penalty of Rs.1,648.
The petitioners argued that ownership had already been transferred through document 1833/2011 and that the consent deed only confirmed that earlier sale.
Reason for the final decision
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department applied section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act. The proceedings explain that when several documents are used to complete one sale, mortgage or settlement transaction, the principal document bears the applicable duty and the other documents may be treated as ancillary instruments.
The authority also relied on earlier departmental decisions treating comparable consent deeds as ancillary documents. The ruling is directly binding on the demand relating to pending document P1/2015 and provides departmental guidance for similar consent documents used to complete an earlier transaction.
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 demand for Rs.79,352 in deficit stamp duty upheld?
No. Proceedings No. 11514/P1/2021 set aside the Sivaganga District Registrar's order that imposed deficit stamp duty of Rs.79,352 and a penalty of Rs.1,648.
Why was the consent deed not treated as a fresh sale document?
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department found that the consent deed completed the transaction recorded in the earlier sale deed, document 1833/2011. It was therefore classified as an ancillary document under section 4 of the Indian Stamp Act.
Did Marimuthu receive any payment for signing the consent deed?
The proceedings state that Marimuthu gave his consent without receiving any further consideration.
Does the ruling directly apply to every consent deed in Tamil Nadu?
The final decision directly concerns pending document P1/2015 at the Paramakudi Sub Registrar Office. The proceedings also refer to earlier departmental decisions that treated similar consent deeds as ancillary documents.
