ப.மு.3383/ப்பி1/2021, சீராய்வு மனு இறுதியாணை, 11.10.2022
The Tamil Nadu Registration Department, through the Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, issued proceedings P.Mu.3383/P1/2021 dated 11 October 2022 concerning pending document P17/2018 at the K.V. Kuppam Sub-Registrar Office. The proceedings accept the revision petition, set aside the District Registrar's order dated 29 May 2020, and classify the family release deed under Article 55A of the Indian Stamp Act instead of treating it as both a partition and a release to a non-family member.
What the proceedings decide
Proceedings P.Mu.3383/P1/2021 dated 11 October 2022 were issued by the Tamil Nadu Registration Department, through the Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority. They concern pending document P17/2018 at the K.V. Kuppam Sub-Registrar Office, described as a release deed relating to a share in property.
The District Registrar had classified the document as having two parts, a family partition under Article 45(a) of the Indian Stamp Act and a release to a person outside the family under Article 55C. On that basis, the District Registrar determined deficient stamp duty of Rs.5,89,862, without imposing a penalty.
The Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority rejected that classification, set aside the District Registrar's order dated 29 May 2020, and allowed the revision petition.
Property and parties
The deed was written on 10 July 2018. Its stated property value was Rs.84,26,600, and it carried stamp duty of Rs.25,000.
The document was executed by:
- P. Saraswathi
- K.P. Shanmugam
- P. Srinivasan
- D. Vijayalakshmi
The release was made in favour of P. Kumar. The proceedings record that the properties had been purchased by K. Pitchandi Gounder, who died on 9 November 2016 without making an arrangement for them. His wife and children inherited the properties jointly as Class I legal heirs. The other heirs then released part of the inherited property to P. Kumar, who paid them Rs.1,00,000 in cash.
Reasons for the revised classification
The Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority found that:
- All the parties fall within the meaning of family under Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act.
- References in the deed to division and allotment did not establish that the properties had already been partitioned.
- The property boundaries showed that several release deeds were executed at the same time to allot portions of jointly inherited property among the heirs.
- The pending document was therefore classifiable under Article 55A of the Indian Stamp Act.
Layout approval direction
Proceedings P.Mu.3383/P1/2021 also state that the agricultural land had been converted into house plots. The District Registrar was directed to verify whether the required layout approval had been obtained under the applicable legal rules. The proceedings do not state whether approval had already been granted.
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 deficient stamp duty demand of Rs.5,89,862 upheld?
No. The Inspector General of Registration and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority set aside the District Registrar's order that had determined deficient stamp duty of Rs.5,89,862.
How was document P17/2018 finally classified?
The document was classified as a family release under Article 55A of the Indian Stamp Act. The earlier classification as both a partition under Article 45(a) and a release to a non-family member under Article 55C was rejected.
Why were P. Kumar and the persons releasing the property treated as family?
The proceedings found that they were the wife and children of K. Pitchandi Gounder and had jointly inherited his properties as Class I legal heirs. They were held to fall within the meaning of family under Article 58(a)(i) of the Indian Stamp Act.
Does the document confirm that the converted plots have layout approval?
No. It directs the District Registrar to verify whether the required layout approval was obtained because the agricultural land had been converted into house plots.
