Stamps and Registration — SARFAESI sale — Stamp duty on sale certificate — Basis of valuation — Market Value Register vs. Auction Price — Scope of Sub-Registrar’s power Stamp duty and registration fee, in case of sale certificates issued by authorised officer under the SARFAESI Act after public auction, cannot be insisted upon on the basis of the market value as reflected in the Market Value Register. Registration Authorities “cannot insist on payment of Stamp Duty and Registration Fee basing on the value of the property as indicated in the Market Value Register”. The Sub-Registrar has “no other option, but to register the sale certificates” by fixing stamp duty based on the successful bid price fetched in the auction, the same being treated as reflecting the true market value as per settled law.

A. Stamps and Registration — SARFAESI sale — Stamp duty on sale certificate — Basis of valuation — Market Value Register vs. Auction Price — Scope of Sub-Registrar’s power

Stamp duty and registration fee, in case of sale certificates issued by authorised officer under the SARFAESI Act after public auction, cannot be insisted upon on the basis of the market value as reflected in the Market Value Register. Registration Authorities “cannot insist on payment of Stamp Duty and Registration Fee basing on the value of the property as indicated in the Market Value Register”. The Sub-Registrar has “no other option, but to register the sale certificates” by fixing stamp duty based on the successful bid price fetched in the auction, the same being treated as reflecting the true market value as per settled law.

(Paras 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

B. SARFAESI Act, 2002 — Sale certificate — Nature and registrability — Consequence for stamp duty

Sale certificates issued by the authorised officer in SARFAESI auctions are compulsorily registrable documents, and when produced for registration, stamp duty is to be levied in accordance with the specific Articles of the Schedule to the Stamp Act on the amount mentioned in the sale certificate, and not on any separate “guideline/market value” maintained by the Government.

(Paras 3, 5, 7, quoted SC passage in para 7)

C. Precedent — Binding nature — Single Bench and Division Bench following Supreme Court — Executive and registering authorities bound

High Court reiterates that the legal position has been clearly laid down by the Supreme Court in V.N. Devadoss and followed by Single Judges and Division Bench of the A.P. High Court, including Mallikarjuna Kondapaneni & Ors. v. State of A.P. & Ors., 2025 SCC OnLine AP 332. Orders of Single Benches allowing writ petitions of auction purchasers and intra-court appeals dismissing State’s challenge, having followed V.N. Devadoss, bind the Executive and registration machinery; yet the issue is “being repeatedly brought up by the Executive”. The Court reiterates that the Registration Department must collect stamp duty and registration fee only on the value mentioned in the sale certificate in such cases.

(Paras 7, 8)

D. Constitution of India — Article 226 — Writ of Mandamus — Inaction of Sub-Registrar refusing registration of sale certificate on auction price — Illegality

Failure and inaction of the Sub-Registrar in not receiving and not registering SARFAESI sale certificates dated 22-03-2024, and in demanding stamp duty on market value instead of auction price of ₹55,10,000, held illegal and contrary to settled law. Mandamus issued directing the Sub-Registrar, Nallapadu, Guntur, to receive and process the sale certificates by assessing stamp duty on the successful bid price and intimate the payable duty to the petitioners within two weeks.

(Paras 6, 9, 10)

E. SARFAESI — Auction purchaser — Right to registration on auction price — Effect of earlier AP High Court orders

Where sale is conducted through public auction under SARFAESI, sale certificate is issued for the auction price and possession is delivered, the auction purchasers are entitled to have the sale certificate registered on that price. Non-consideration of petitioners’ representations and non-compliance with earlier final orders of the High Court (e.g., W.P. No.15400 of 2018 holding that stamp duty is payable on the amount mentioned in the sale certificate and not on guideline value) justifies interference under Article 226 and grant of relief.

(Recital in prayer; Paras 3–6, 9, 10)