IIN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAVI
WEDNESDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 8TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 20440 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
V.K.VIJAYAKUMAR,
AGED 59 YEARS
S/O. (LATE) V.K. KUTTIKRISHNAN
VADAKKE VEEDU, VARODE POST,
PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN CODE 678 572.
BY ADVS.
SHAKTHI PRAKASH
K.DHRUV KUMAR
HARIKRISHNAN M.S.
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
REGISTRATION DEPARTMENT,
GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.
2 THE SUB REGISTRAR,
SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE,
PARALI, PALAKKAD 678 612.
3 ADDL.R3: THE SUB REGISTRAR
SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE,
KOTTAYI, PALAKKAD - 678572
ADDL. R3 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEDED AS PER ORDER DATED
29.06.2022 IN WPC NO.20440/2022.
SRI. BIMAL K. NATH, SR.GP.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: :
WP(C) NO. 20440 OF 2022
2
T.R.RAVI, J.
----------------------------------------
WP(C) No.20440 OF 2022
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
Admit. Government Pleader takes notice for respondents.
2. The prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to provisionally accept and register the Sale Deed, a draft copy of which has been produced, without insisting that the petitioner's sisters, to be parties to the document.
3. The grievance of the petitioner is that even though the documents have been produced for registration, the same was denied. It is the settled law that the registering officer under Rule 67 of the Registration Rules is not expected to enquire into the validity of a document brought for registration or to attend to any written or verbal protest against the registration of a document. The objections that the Registrar is bound to consider are enumerated in the Rules. The 2 nd respondent, according to the petitioner is under a wrong assumption that WP(C) NO. 20440 OF 2022 3 by amendment of the provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 2005, the female members of the joint family were granted coparcenary right and the said position would apply in the case of the petitioner also, and has hence refused registration. The petitioner submits that as far as the State of Kerala is concerned, the Joint Hindu Family system was abolished by Act 30 of 1976. I do not think that this Court should go into the merits of the contentions in this writ petition.
4. The writ petition is disposed of directing the 3 rd respondent to accept and register the sale deed which is produced for registration. It is made clear that this Court is not expressing any opinion regarding the rights of the female members and if any such right is put forward in a civil proceedings, the registration of the document will be subject to any decision that may be taken by the Civil Court.
Sd/-
T.R.RAVI JUDGE sn WP(C) NO. 20440 OF 2022 4 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 20440/2022 PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED EXECUTED BY PETITIONER'S FATHER BEARING DOC. NOS. 2391/2003 OF SRO PARALI.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED EXECUTED BY PETITIONER'S BROTHER BEARING NO. 2392/2003 OF SRO PARALI.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S FATHER DATED 21.06.1977. Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DRAFT SALE DEED. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPIES OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 30.05.2022.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 18.01.2022.
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE