High CourtsSINGLE BENCH(2017) 10 MAD CK 0081

R.D.Sathya Narayana Raju vs The Inspector General of Registration, & Ors.

Madras High Court · Decided on 9 October 2017

HON’BLE JUDGES
G.R.Swaminathan
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
824 of 2017 and C M P (MD) No 8869 of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 188 words
1.

The appellant has challenged the impugned order dated 25.04.2016 issued by the first respondent herein under Section 47(A)(5) of the Stamp Act.

2.

The appellant contended that he received notice dated 05.04.2016 fixing the enquiry date as 05.04.2016 on 07.04.2016. It appears that the enquiry date that was actually fixed was 13.04.2016.

3.

The learned Additional Government Pleader submits that as per the note file, the enquiry date was 13.04.2016 only. However, due to an inadvertent typing error in the notice copy served on the appellant, the date of enquiry was wrongly mentioned as 05.04.2016, as a result, the appellant did not appear before the first respondent, even though a personal hearing was fixed on 13.04.2016.

4.

On the ground of violation of principles of natural justice, I quash the order impugned in this civil miscellaneous appeal. The matter is remitted to the file of the first respondent with a direction to hold a fresh enquiry and after affording full opportunity to the appellant, pass orders in accordance with law.

5.

This civil miscellaneous appeal is allowed as indicated above. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.