Proceedings ப.மு.8305/ப்பி1/2022, Rectification Deed Revision Final Order
The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority issued Proceedings ப.மு.8305/ப்பி1/2022 dated 15 September 2022, dismissing S. Udhayakumar's revision petition concerning pending document P46/2021 at the Peelamedu Sub-Registrar Office. The proceeding upholds the Coimbatore District Registrar's decision to treat the rectification deed as a construction agreement and assess deficit stamp duty of Rs.99,976.
What the proceeding decides
Proceedings ப.மு.8305/ப்பி1/2022 dated 15 September 2022 concerns pending document P46/2021 at the Peelamedu Sub-Registrar Office. The Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority:
- dismissed the revision petition filed under section 56(1) of the Indian Stamp Act;
- upheld the Coimbatore District Registrar's classification of the document under Article 5(i) as a construction agreement; and
- confirmed the deficit stamp duty assessment of Rs.99,976 made under section 40(1)(b).
Document and dispute
Pending document P46/2021 was described as a rectification deed and was executed on 12 March 2021. It showed a construction value of Rs.1,00,07,600 and carried stamp duty of Rs.100.
The deed sought to change the flat number in registered construction agreement 2604/2020 from Flat No.3A to Flat No.3B. The petitioner argued that Flat No.3A had appeared because of a typing error and that it had later been allotted to another person, Manimala, through document 429/2021.
The Coimbatore District Registrar concluded that P46/2021 could be classified as a new construction agreement rather than merely as a correction of a typing error.
Reasons for the decision
Proceedings ப.மு.8305/ப்பி1/2022 records that construction agreement 2604/2020 was executed and registered on 28 August 2020, about five months before document 429/2021 was executed in favour of Manimala on 3 February 2021.
The related sale deed, document 2605/2020 dated 28 August 2020, also identified the property as Flat No.3A. That sale deed was later changed to Flat No.3B through rectification deed 1975/2021, registered on 12 August 2021.
Based on these records, the authority found that P46/2021 was intended to change the location from Flat No.3A to Flat No.3B. It also found that the contractual right relating to Flat No.3B arose through P46/2021 itself.
Who may be affected
Proceedings ப.மு.8305/ப்பி1/2022 directly concerns the parties to pending document P46/2021 and the deficit stamp duty assessed for that document. It is also relevant to buyers, owners and document professionals dealing with a rectification deed that changes the identified flat and creates contractual rights over a different flat, rather than correcting only a clerical mistake.
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 change from Flat No.3A to Flat No.3B accepted as a typing correction?
No. The authority found that the document changed the identified location and created the parties' contractual right concerning Flat No.3B.
How much deficit stamp duty was confirmed for document P46/2021?
The Coimbatore District Registrar assessed Rs.99,976, and the Head of the Tamil Nadu Registration Department and Chief Controlling Revenue Authority upheld that assessment.
Why was the rectification deed treated as a construction agreement?
The earlier construction agreement and related sale deed both referred to Flat No.3A. The authority concluded that changing the property to Flat No.3B was a change of location that created a contractual right over Flat No.3B.
Does the proceeding set a charge for every rectification deed?
The proceeding decides the classification and deficit stamp duty for pending document P46/2021. The source does not state that every rectification deed must receive the same treatment.
