AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioner purchased an extent of 02.03 Ares of land comprised in Resurvey No.188/16-3-2-1 (Old Survey No.857/20) of Vembayam Village, Nedumangad Taluk in an auction sale conducted by the 2nd respondent Bank under the provisions of the Securitization And Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (‘SARFAESI Act’ for short). Petitioner paid the entire amount to the 2nd respondent and thereafter sale certificate, copy of which has been produced as Ext.P1 was issued to the petitioner. When the petitioner approached the 1st respondent Sub Registrar for entering the same in Book No.1, the Sub Registrar insisted for payment of stamp duty. Contending that stamp duty is not payable in view of the law laid down by this Court in various judgments, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
In State of Kerala v. Ramakrishnan Sunil Babu [2026 KLT OnLine 1716], a Full Bench of this Court ruled that stamp duty is not required to be paid for the filing of a certificate of sale that is issued in connection with a sale under the SARFAESI Act. The Hon'ble Apex Court has suspended the operation of the aforementioned judgment vide the order dated 04.08.2026 in Special Leave to Appeal (C) Nos.24921-24924 of 2026. I am of the opinion that it would be improper to direct the Sub Registrar to file a copy of the sale certificate in Book No.1 without paying stamp duty in such circumstances. Nevertheless, I am also of the view that the petitioner needs to be permitted to get a copy of the Ext.P1 sale certificate filed in Book No.1 as otherwise it would lead to hardships and loss. I find that the sale certificate can be directed to be filed by either paying stamp duty on Ext.P1 or by making certain that the property covered by the sale certificate is a charge for the stamp duty, in order to protect the interest of the State also. This would be subject to the final judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court.
I therefore dispose this writ petition with the following directions: -
The respondent Sub Registrar is directed to file a copy of the sale certificate issued to the petitioner in Book No.1 in accordance with Section 89(4) of the Registration Act. This is subject to the condition that the petitioner either paying the stamp duty on Ext.P1 or charging the property covered by the sale certificate for the stamp duty, subject to the final judgment to be rendered by the Hon'ble Apex Court.
ii) The Sub Registrar shall remove the entry related to the charge made or shall refund the stamp duty paid, as the case may be, if the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court is against the State. This shall be done within a period of 3 weeks in the situation mentioned first and in two months in the latter case, on submission of an application by the petitioner, along with a copy of the judgment of the Apex Court.
iii) In the event that the Apex Court rules in favour of the State and a charge is placed over the property as afore stated, the petitioner will have the option to pay the stamp duty and have the entry pertaining to the charge removed from the records by submitting an application to the Sub Registrar. If the stamp duty is not remitted by the petitioner, the Sub Registrar will be free to recover it in accordance with the law.