ப.மு.எண். 14474/ப்பி1/2019, சீராய்வு மனு இறுதியாணை
The Tamil Nadu Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings No. 14474/P1/2019 dated 6 March 2024, deciding a revision concerning pending document P49/2017 at the Uthiramerur Sub Registrar Office. The proceedings reject the Chengalpattu District Registrar's classification of the document as a release to a non-family member under Article 55(C), conclude that it is chargeable under Article 55A, dismiss the earlier District Registrar order and the revision petition, and direct the District Registrar to issue a corrected order.
What the proceedings cover
Proceedings No. 14474/P1/2019 dated 6 March 2024 concern document P49/2017, pending at the Uthiramerur Sub Registrar Office. The document was written on 8 April 2017 and described as a receipt.
The document was executed by R. Suseela and C. Thilagavathi in favour of their brother, M. Sankar. It confirmed that each sister had received Rs.1,00,000 under a condition in their late father's will. It also stated that they had no rights in the property given to M. Sankar under that will and would not make future claims.
Earlier stamp duty decision
The Chengalpattu District Registrar treated document P49/2017 as a release in favour of a non-family member under Article 55(C). The District Registrar assessed deficient stamp duty of Rs.19,62,189 and a penalty of Rs.811. The document itself carried stamp duty of Rs.2.
R. Suseela filed a revision petition against that decision. Her arguments included that recovery could be made from M. Sankar and that properties in which the sisters had no rights should be removed before classification.
Final classification and reasoning
The Tamil Nadu Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority found that the sisters and brother were not co-owners of the property. Their interest arose only as a claim connected with the condition in the will, rather than ownership obtained by operation of law.
The proceedings identify two features in the document:
- A receipt for the amounts paid under the will, falling under Article 53.
- A release of the sisters' claim that they would not assert rights over the property, falling under Article 55A.
Because the executants and recipient were sisters and brother, the document could not be classified as a release to a non-family member under Article 55(C). Applying section 6 of the Indian Stamp Act, the authority concluded that stamp duty was chargeable under Article 55A.
Who is affected and final direction
The decision directly affects R. Suseela, C. Thilagavathi, M. Sankar and pending document P49/2017. It also directs the Chengalpattu District Registrar to issue an appropriate corrected order.
The proceedings dismiss both the District Registrar's earlier order and the revision petition. They do not state the revised stamp duty amount or penalty to be included in the corrected order.
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
Is document P49/2017 treated only as a receipt?
No. The proceedings recognise the payment acknowledgment as a receipt under Article 53, but also find that the document releases a claim under Article 55A. Under section 6, it is chargeable under Article 55A.
Why was classification under Article 55(C) rejected?
The executants and recipient were sisters and brother, and the sisters were not co-owners of the property. The authority therefore found that the document could not be classified as a release to a non-family member.
Does the earlier demand of Rs.19,62,189 and Rs.811 continue?
The Chengalpattu District Registrar's order containing that demand was dismissed, and the District Registrar was directed to issue a corrected order. The proceedings do not state the revised amount.
Does Proceedings No. 14474/P1/2019 change stamp duty generally?
The text decides the revision concerning pending document P49/2017 and its classification. It does not state a general change to stamp duty rates or rules.
