Thereafter, the appellant is stated to have passed an order dated, holding that the explanation submitted by the respondent was not convincing and therefore, a sum of Rs.2,66,530 by way of deficit stamp duty along with a sum of Rs.5000 by was of penalty was being levied. The respondent submitted his reply dated, contending that it was purely a partition deed, that in a partition deed, all the co-sharers need not be allotted properties, that the properties partitioned under the document can be allotted to one or some sharers to the exclusion of others and therefore, the said document cannot be construed as a composite deed of partition as well as release.
#Prasanth chandran registration
While directing the respondent to show cause why the deficit stamp duty and registration fee along with penalty should not be collected, it was also held that the respondent could prefer an appeal within the time stipulated, namely, 15 days of the receipt of the said letter dated. In the said notice, after referring to Clauses (1) and (2) of the document, the appellant also reached a conclusion that it required collection of deficit stamp duty of Rs.2,66,530, deficit registration fee of Rs.66,700 apart from penalty of Rs.5000, in all a sum of Rs.3,38,230. 142/2003, inasmuch as the recitals contained in the said document would fall within provision of Section 5 of the Indian Stamp Act and therefore, it was impounded for payment of deficit stamp duty and registration fee as well as penalty. Thereafter by a notice dated, the appellant held that the said document has been lying in its office as ‘Pending Document’ bear ing No. The document was stated to have been presented immediately after its execution before the appellant.
#Prasanth chandran full
Prashanth Chandran, is accepted and acknowledged as the allotment of the property in full and final settlement of the rights of the parties of the first part in toto.”Ĥ. The allotment of the ‘A’ Schedule property as above to Mr. 3 of the parties of the first part exclusively, to be held and enjoyed by him as on absolute owner thereof.
“( 1 ) With the consent and concurrence of all parties and by way of family arrangement, the properties set out in Schedule ‘A’ here under is allotted to Mr. That part of the deed by which, ‘A’ Schedule property came to be allotted to the respondent is found in Clause (1) of the document which reads as under: Under the said document, the re spondent was allotted ‘A’ Schedule property while ‘B’ Schedule property was allotted to the paternal uncle and his children. There was a partition between the respondent, his father and his brother on the one side and the paternal uncle and his sons on the other side, by a deed dated. The brief facts which led to the filing of the Writ Petition, are required to be stated: By the impugned order, the re spondent’s writ petition challenging the notice dated came to be allowed with a further direction to the appellant herein for registration of the document presented by the respondent within a period of 15 days and for the release of the same.ģ. The challenge is to the order of the learned single Judge dated in W.P. The Joint Sub Registrar-I, District Registrar Office, Coimbatore is the appellant.