High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2022-03-29Writ petition disposed of; Sub Registrar’s stan...

W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022

Case / Petition Number:WP(C) No. 9760 of 2022

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Devan Ramachandran
Judgment Date: 2022-03-29
Court Decision / Holding: The judge upholds the Sub Registrar’s position, dismissing the petition in substance, but grants liberty to the petitioners to approach the Sub Registrar for adjudication and payment of stamp duty under Ext.P11 within the directions of the judgment. Registration will be acceded to subject to satisfaction of all other legal requirements.
Final Disposition: Writ petition disposed of; Sub Registrar’s stand maintained; petitioners granted liberty to approach the Sub Registrar for adjudication and payment of stamp duty; registration to be effected subject to law and other formalities.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

VALSAMMA MATHEW
MANJITH T. MATHEW
ALEX RANJITH MATHEW
REGI ALEX
SHEBA ALEX
ELSA ALEX

Respondents

The Inspector General, Department of Registration, Vanchiyoor P.O, Thiruvananthapuram, PIN 695 035
The District Registrar (General), Pathanamthitta, O/O the District Registrar, Valanchuzhy, Pathanamthitta District, PIN 689 645
The Sub Registrar, Thiruvalla, O/O the Sub Registrar, Revenue Tower Road, Thiruvalla, Pathanamthitta District, PIN 689 101
The Tahsildar (LR), Thiruvalla Taluk, Revenue Tower, 4th Floor, Revenue Tower Road, Thiruvalla, Pathanamthitta District, PIN 689 101

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Susanth Shaji
• V.V. Shaji

Counsels for Respondents

• SMT. MABLE C. KURIAN, SR.G.P.

Case Synopsis & Summary

This writ petition concerns six individuals (Valsamma Mathew, Manjith T. Mathew, Alex Ranjith Mathew, Regi Alex, Sheba Alex, Elsa Alex) who inherited property originally owned by Thomas Mathew and Alex P. Alex. After the deaths of the original executants, their legal heirs filed Ext.P11 for partition and claimed eligibility for the lesser stamp duty under Section 2(fb) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959. The Sub Registrar declined the benefit, prompting the petitioners to invoke judicial intervention. The court discusses Abdul Muneer v. Sub Registrar (2018 (1) KLT 238) as a Full Bench declaration that could render such heirs eligible; however, it ultimately finds Abdul Muneer inapplicable to the present facts since the petitioners and the original executants were not related across the relevant family branch. The judge analyzes the relationship constraint and rules that the petition cannot be granted based on the Abdul Muneer precedent alone. Nevertheless, the court leaves room for reconsideration by directing the Sub Registrar to adjudicate Ext.P11 and assess stamp duty, with liberty to the petitioners to approach the Sub Registrar before 31.03.2022 and remit the duty. The court notes the stamp duty hike effective from 01.04.2022 and emphasizes that technicalities should not bar benefits if the petitioners comply with directions. The order ultimately directs registration conditioned on compliance with law.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 2(fb) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners submit that the Full Bench declarations in Abdul Muneer v. Sub Registrar would render the heirs of Thomas Mathew and Alex P. Alex eligible for the lesser stamp duty under Section 2(fb) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959, even after the death of the original executants, because partition among legal heirs should carry the benefit within the same family branch. They contend that the present partition among their lines should attract the same benefit if lawfully adjudicated.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents maintain that the Sub Registrar’s stand is correct and that Section 2(fb) benefits cannot be extended to heirs where the original executants were not closely related; Abdul Muneer does not apply to the facts of this case. They urge dismissal of the petition and adherence to statutory criteria, emphasizing the need for proper adjudication of stamp duty by the competent authority.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Abdul Muneer v. Sub Registrar	2018 (1) KLT 238	Distinguished	The Full Bench declarations in Abdul Muneer are not applicable to the present petitioners because the original executants and petitioners are not related across the necessary family branches; hence the decision does not extend Stamp Act benefits in this scenario.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN TUESDAY, THE 29[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1944** ## **WP(C) NO. 9760 OF 2022** ## **PETITIONERS:** - 1 VALSAMMA MATHEW, - AGED 63 YEARS W/O. LATE THOMAS MATHEW, PAREKADAVIL NO. 5, KALLOOPPARA MURI, ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 583. - 2 MANJITH T. MATHEW, AGED 42 YEARS S/O. LATE THOMAS MATHEW, PAREKADAVIL NO. 5, KALLOOPPARA MURI, ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 583. - 3 ALEX RANJITH MATHEW, AGED 36 YEARS - S/O.LATE THOMAS MATHEW, PAREKADAVIL NO. 5, KALLOOPPARA MURI, ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 583. - 4 REGI ALEX, AGED 63 YEARS W/O. LATE ALEX P. ALEX, PAREKADAVIL HOUSE, ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE, ERAVIPEROOR MURI, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 542. - 5 SHEBA ALEX, AGED 39 YEARS W/O. GEORGE C. VARKEY, & D/O. LATE ALEX P. ALEX, NO. 63, CD NAGAR, BEHIND KASHI TEMPLE, DASARAHALLI, HEBBAL, BANGALORE NORTH, KARNATAKA-560 024 - 6 ELSA ALEX, AGED 36 YEARS W/O. MATHEWS ABRAHAM & D/O. LATE ALEX P. ALEX, MAVELIKATTU THADATHEL, PURAMATTAM VILLAGE, VENNIKULAM P.O, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT 689 544. BY ADVS. SUSANTH SHAJI V.V.SHAJI 2 ## W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 ## ALBIN A. JOSEPH ## **RESPONDENTS:** - 1 THE INSPECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION, VANCHIYOOR P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 035 - 2 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR (GENERAL), PATHANAMTHITTA, O/O. THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, VALANCHUZHY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 645. - 3 THE SUB REGISTRAR, THIRUVALLA, O/O. THE SUB REGISTRAR, REVENUE TOWER ROAD, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 101. - 4 THE TAHSILDAR (LR), THIRUVALLA TALUK, REVENUE TOWER, 4TH FLOOR, REVENUE TOWER ROAD, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 101. SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN.SR.G.P. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 3 W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 ## **JUDGMENT** **Dated this the 29th day of March, 2022 .** The property in this case was originally owned by Sri.Thomas Mathew and Sri.Alex P.Alex. After both of them died, their respective legal heirs presented Ext.P11 document for partition and claimed the benefit of lesser stamp duty, under the provision of Section 2(fb) of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 (“the Act” for short). 2. This was, however, objected by the Sub Registrar, saying that the executants of the said document will not obtain the benefit of Section 2(fb) of the Act; and this has been assailed by the petitioners before me, contending that the declarations of law by a learned Full Bench of this Court in **Abdul Muneer v. Sub Registrar [2018 (1) KLT 238]** , would render them 4 W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 fully eligible to such. 3. Shorn of all unnecessary details, it is inevitable that, going by the submissions of Sri.Susanth Shaji – learned counsel for the petitioner, late Thomas Mathew and late Alex P.Alex were not related and had they attempted a partition between themselves, it would not have entitled them lesser stamp duty, under Section 2(fb) of the Act. Therefore, the only question is whether, after they died and their legal heirs partitioned the property among themselves, would they obtain the said benefit. 4. Even at first glance, the declarations of the Full Bench of this Court **Abdul Muneer** (supra) will not come to the aid of the petitioners because, though they are related to each other within the same branch, they have absolutely no relationship with each other across the 5 W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 other. As I have already said above, had late Thomas Mathew and late Alex P.Alex being related, within the ambit of Section 2(fb) of the Act, then certainly, their legal heirs may have also got the benefit under it. However, since they were not so, after their death, it would be incongruous to hold that their legal heirs can then claim a lesser stamp duty, merely because they are related to one another within the same branch. Resultantly, I have no hesitation to hold that the stand adopted by the Sub Registrar is without error; and I, therefore leave liberty to the petitioners to represent Ext.P11, supported by the necessary stamp duty to be determined by the said Authority; in which event, its Registration will be acceded to, subject to all other requirements and formalities, as per law, being satisfied. At this time, Sri.Susanth Shaji intervened to say that 6 W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 since the stamp duty is being enhanced with effect from 01.04.2022, his clients may be granted permission to approach the Sub Registrar on any day before 31.03.2022 and represent the document, so as to enable them to remit the same before that date. This request certainly is one which this Court can accede to; and I, therefore, direct the learned Senior Government Pleader to instruct the Sub Registrar appropriately today itself, without awaiting a certified copy of this judgment; and consequently, leave liberty to the petitioner to approach the said Authority for adjudication and payment of stamp duty in terms of this judgment. I also make it clear that merely on technical reasons, including insufficiency of “tokens” etc., the benefits will not be refused to the petitioners, if they act 7 W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 in terms of the afore directions. **Sd/DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE** Raj/29.03.2022. 8 ## W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 ## **`APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9760/2022`** ``` PETITIONER EXHIBITS ``` - `Exhibit P1 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 1859/1972 OF SRO, THIRUVALLA.` - `Exhibit P2 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF SHRI. THOMAS MATHEW ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.` - `Exhibit P3 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE OF SHRI ALEX P. ALEX ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF BIRTHS AND DEATHS, ERAVIPEROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT.` - `Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE FAMILY MEMBERSHIP CERTIFICATE OF SHRI. THOMAS MATHEW DATED 17.06.2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLOOPPARA VILLAGE.` - `Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRSHIP CERTIFICATE OF SHRI. ALEX P. ALEX DATED 18.05.2013 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR, THIRUVALLA TALUK.` - `Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROPERTY IN RE- SY. NO.39/11 OF ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE.` - `Exhibit P7 TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 05.08.2021 IN W.P.C NO. 15864/2021 ON THE FILES OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.` - `Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE SURVEY SKETCH DATED` 9 ## W.P.(C) No. 9760 of 2022 ``` 11.01.2022 FOR THE PROPERTY IN RE. SY. NO. 39/11 OF ERAVIPEROOR VILLAGE ISSUED BY TH 4TH RESPONDENT. ``` ``` Exhibit P9 ``` ``` Exhibit P10 ``` - `Exhibit P11` - `Exhibit P12` ``` TRUE PHOTOSTAT OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT/ RECEIPT FOR ONLINE TOKEN REGISTRATION GENERATED FROM THE REGISTRATION WEBSITE. ``` ``` TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PAY IN SLIP DATED 17.03.2022 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SUB TREASURY, THIRUVALLA. ``` ``` TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED DATED 18.03.2022 SIGNED AND EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONERS. ``` ``` TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19.03.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. ```