Proceedings of the Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Chennai-28, P.Mu. No. 18115/P1/2016, dated 09.02.2017

What this document is

The Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, Chennai-28 issued proceedings P.Mu. No. 18115/P1/2016 dated 09.02.2017. It is a final decision on an appeal under the Indian Stamp Act, connected to Document No. P22/2015, a partition deed presented for registration at the Chinnadharapuram Sub-Registrar Office, Karur.

Who and what it concerns

This guidance is relevant if a partition deed involves heirs from a second marriage and the registration authorities classify different shares differently for stamp duty purposes.

The partition deed parties named in the proceedings are:

• Thirumathi Valliyammal, wife of late Karuppanna Gounder (mother of late Muthusamy Gounder)
• Thiru M. Shanmugam, son of late Muthusamy Gounder (through the first wife Samiyathaal)
• Thirumathi Poongodi, wife of late Muthusamy Gounder (second wife)
• Thiru M. Karthikeyan, son of late Muthusamy Gounder (through Poongodi)

Key facts recorded

• The document is a partition deed, filed on 15.06.2015 as Document No. P22/2015.
• The properties are described as having come to Karuppanna Gounder through a sale deed (Document No. 1876/1954) and an unregistered partition deed, then to his only heir Muthusamy Gounder, and later enjoyed jointly by the parties.
• The parties were dividing the property and family funds of Rs. 2,00,000.

What the dispute was about

The District Registrar, Karur examined the document and treated it as having three different natures for stamp duty calculation, including treating the share allotted to the son born to the second wife as a non-family partition share. The appeal argued that the second marriage took place after the first wife died, and that Poongodi and her son are Class I heirs, so the document should be treated as a family partition.

Decision and practical effect

The proceedings state that the District Registrar’s classification of the share for the fourth party (the son born to the second wife) as a non-family partition share was not legally sustainable. It records that both Shanmugam and Karthikeyan are lawful heirs of Muthusamy. The District Registrar, Karur is instructed to issue a corrected order based on this.