On December 16, 2025, the Madras High Court, under Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, dealt with a case involving a promissory note that was mistakenly treated as a sale deed. This case brought up important questions about how documents are classified and the related stamp duty.
The person who brought the case, P. Kalpana, filed a petition against the District Collector and other officials from Thiruvallur District. The issue started when a promissory note dated June 17, 2014, was used in a civil case (O.S.No.104 of 2015) in Thiruvallur. The judge there thought it was a sale deed because it wasn’t stamped, leading to it being held for stamp duty evaluation.
P. Kalpana’s lawyer argued that the document was wrongly seen as a sale deed, which led to incorrect stamp duty charges. The government’s lawyer, Mr. U. Baranidharan, mentioned that a review could be sought with the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority, according to Section 56 of the Indian Stamp Act.
"The title of the document is not determinative," noted Justice Ramamoorthy.
The court decided not to use its special power since P. Kalpana had another option. She could file a review petition with the Inspector General of Registration within 30 days. This would allow her to challenge how the document was classified and the stamp duty charges.
The court closed the miscellaneous petition without any order on costs, giving P. Kalpana a clear route to address her concerns with the authorities in Thiruvallur.
