Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Samson And Sons Builders And ... vs A.Gireesh Kumar
2021 Latest Caselaw 18326 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 18326 Ker
Judgement Date : 7 September, 2021

Kerala High Court
Samson And Sons Builders And ... vs A.Gireesh Kumar on 7 September, 2021
                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
         Tuesday, the 7th day of September 2021 / 16th Bhadra, 1943
          CON.CASE(C) NO. 1126 OF 2021(S) IN WP(C) No.2533 OF 2021
PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:

  1. SAMSON AND SONS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT.LTD HAVING REGISTERED
     OFFICE AT TC 3/678, TKD ROAD, MUTTADA , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025,
     REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR.JOHN JACOB
  2. Mr..SAMUEL JACOB, DIRECTOR, SAMSON AND SONS BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS
     PVT.,LTD, HAVING REGISTERED OFFICE AT TC 3/678, TKD ROAD, MUTTADA ,
     THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 025,

   BY ADVS.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.),P.MARTIN JOSE,THOMAS P.KURUVILLA,MANJUNATH
   MENON,P.PRIJITH,AJAY BEN JOSE,
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT No.2:

     Mr.A.GIREESH KUMAR, THE SUB REGISTRAR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE,
     KARAKULAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,PIN-695 564

    BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
07.09.2021, the court on the same day passed the following:
      Exhibit P4:- True copy of sale deed   dated   9/12/2020 executed    in
favour of the 4th Respondent.

     Exhibit P5:- True copy of sale deed    dated 6/1/2021 executed     in
favour of the 5th Respondent.

     Exhibit P6:- True copy of sale deed    dated 18/1/2021 executed     in
favour of the Respondents 6 and 7
                            V.G.ARUN (J)
                        -----------------------
                 Con.Case(C) No.1126 of 2021
                ------------------------------------
             Dated this the 7th day of September, 2021

                           ORDER

The stand of the respondent, as reflected from the

affidavit, is that, despite the direction of this Court, the

petitioners are liable to pay the fine amount stipulated in

Rule 44 of the Registration Rules (Kerala) 1958.

2. Rule 44 dealing with fines for delays in

presentation and appearance under Sections 25 and 34 reads

as under:

When the delay does not A fine equal to the exceed one week after the registration fee expiration of the time allowed for presentation or appearance When the delay exceeds one A fine equal to twice the week but does not exceed one registration fee calendar month When the delay exceeds one A fine equal to five times month but does not exceed two the registration fee months When the delay exceeds two A fine equal to ten times the months but does not exceed registration fee four months Con.Case(C) No.1126 of 2021

Section 25 of the Registration Act deals with cases

where delay in presentation is unavoidable and Section 34

provides for an enquiry before registration.

3. In his affidavit, the respondent has also stated

that as per the Kerala Registration Manual Orders MO:

411, the Registering Officer, who registers a document

presented after four months of execution, acts without

authority and that, Rule 189 of the Registration Rules

(Kerala) 1958, makes such officer liable for revenue loss, if

any, to the Government.

4. In the case at hand, the documents were

submitted for registration within time, but were refused to

be registered on the premise that the Enforcement

Directorate had issued a letter to the Registering

Authority, interdicting the registration. The Enforcement

Directorate clarified that they had no objection in the

documents being registered and accordingly, Annexure - I

judgment was rendered by this Court directing the

respondent to register Exts.P4, P5 and P6 sale deeds. In Con.Case(C) No.1126 of 2021

consonance with the direction, the petitioners produced

the documents for registration and the respondents, again

refused to register the documents, without payment of fine

under Rule 44 of the Kerala Registration Rules. The

alleged reason being that the documents were presented

after four months of execution. Indisputably, the obstinate

and unjustified stand taken by the Registering Authority at

the first instance is the sole reason for the delay in

registration. The documents, though presented within

time, were not accepted. The objection against registration

having been found to be without substance and this Court

having directed registration of the documents, the

respondent is bound to abide by the direction, rather than

raising unmerited objections, as has been done through

this affidavit.

Post this matter after ten days.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE RK

07-09-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter