T. Muthu Balu vs. The Inspector General of Registration Chennai & Anr. AIR 2014 Madras 240
The
petitioner executed a Settlement Deed, in respect of certain items of
properties mentioned in the schedule to a document, in favour of his
great-grand daughter S. Sugirtha, dated 11-11-2011, the same was on the
file of the Sub-Registrar, Madurai, the 2nd respondent herein. The
petitioner claimed exemption from payment of normal Stamp Duty stating
that the settlement is between persons coming under the term “Family”
mentioned in Article 58(a) of Schedule-I to the Indian Stamp Act, 1899.
However, the 2nd respondent did not release the document and insisted on
payment of normal stamp duty on the ground that the registration fee in
the instant case would not be covered under Article 58(a), in view of
Explanation to Article 58(a) of Schedule-I of the Indian Stamp Act.
The
Hon’ble Court observed that the word “family” as defined in the
Explanation to Article 58(a) of Schedule I, appended to the Stamp Act,
would mean only such of those persons mentioned in the Explanation. The
definition to the word “family” is exhaustive and not illustrative and
it is applicable only to such of those persons indicated therein and it
will not extend to other persons who do not form part of the definition
“family”. The interpretation of the word “means” in the Explanation will
be specific to the members of the family mentioned therein.
The
definition cannot give an extended or expanded meaning to the word
“grand child” to include “great grand child” also. It is for the state
government to include great grandchild and other remote lineal
descendants, as members of the family, it they chose to, for the purpose
of extending the benefit of the concessional stamp duty applicable to
settlement within the members of the family.
