Kerala High Court
Vrinda Reji vs Inspector General Of ... on 12 June, 2023
W.P.(C)No.16304/2023 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 16304 OF 2023
PETITIONER:
VRINDA REJI
AGED 20 YEARS
D/O REJI GOPINATHAN, SRA 42-A, CHEKKALA VILAKOM
PANAYIL HOUSE, NALANCHIRA. P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM., PIN - 695015
BY ADV M.HEMALATHA
RESPONDENTS:
1 INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION
DEPARTMENT OF REGISTRATION. VANCHIYOOR. P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
2 THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, 1ST FLOOR,
TRANSPORT BHAVAN, SOUTH STREET ROAD, FORT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695023
3 THE SUB REGISTRAR
OFFICE OF THE SUB REGISTRAR MINI CIVIL STATION,
POTHENCODE. P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-, PIN - 695584
SMT. DEEPA. V. (GOVERNMENT PLEADER)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
12.06.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C)No.16304/2023 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner obtained 8.09 Ares of land in Survey No.1100,
Block No.15, Re.Sy. No.311/9 of Uliyazhathura Village in
Thiruvananthapuram District through Settlement Deed registered as
No.2438/2011 at the Sub Registrar's Office, Pothencode. The
Settlement Deed was executed by the petitioner's grandmother. The
petitioner's grandmother passed away and after her death, the
petitioner is in absolute possession and enjoyment of the aforesaid
property. The petitioner proposes to sell the property covered by Ext.P1
Settlement Deed. According to the petitioner, this is to meet the
marriage expenses of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the
petitioner makes reference to Ext.P3 invitation card which shows that
the marriage of the petitioner is to be solemnized on 9.9.2023.
2. According to the petitioner, prospective purchasers have
refused to enter into any transaction on account of the stipulation in
Ext.P1 Settlement Deed that the petitioner will be able to sell the
property only after attaining the age of 25 years. Though the petitioner
approached the 3rd respondent-Sub Registrar, he issued Ext.P5
communication stating that the clause in Ext.P1 Settlement Deed, is
badly on the petitioner. The petitioner's application before the District
Registrar was also rejected on the ground that the District Registrar can
interfere only if registration is refused by the Sub Registrar.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would refer
to Sections 10 and 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (hereinafter
referred to as the Act). It is submitted that under Section 10 of the Act,
where property is transferred subject to a condition or limitation
absolutely restraining the trasnferee or any person claiming under him
from parting with or disposing of his interest in the property, the
condition or limitation is void, except in the case of a lease where the
condition is provided for the benefit of the lessor or those claiming
under him. It is pointed out that, under Section 11 of the Act, where an
interest is created in an immovable property but the terms of the deed
direct that such interest shall be applied or enjoyed by him in a
particular manner, the person in favour of whom the document is
executed shall be entitled to receive and dispose of such interest as if
there were no such direction. The learned counsel would, therefore,
submit that the stipulation in Ext.P1 that the petitioner shall not
dispose of the property until she attains the age of 25 is contrary to the
provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act and the petitioner was
permitted to enter into transactions in respect of that property without
being bound by that condition.
4. The learned Government Pleader on instructions would
submit that the petitioner had not presented any document for
registration before the 3rd respondent. It is submitted that respondents
2 and 3 have no jurisdiction to declare that any condition in the prior
document is null and void. It is submitted that the communications
issued by respondents 2 and 3 cannot, therefore, be faulted in law.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the
official respondents, I am of the view that the stipulation contained in
Ext.P1 Settlement Deed that the petitioner shall not be entitled to
dispose of the property covered by Ext.P1 until she attains the age of 25
would be contrary to the provisions of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act.
Sections 10 and 11 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 to the extent
they are relevant are extracted hereunder:-
"10.Condition restraining alienation.--Where property
is transferred subject to a condition or limitation absolutely
restraining the transferee or any person claiming under him
from parting with or disposing of his interest in the property,
the condition or limitation is void, except in the case of a lease
where the condition is for the benefit of the lessor or those
claiming under him: provided that property may be
transferred to or for the benefit of a woman (not being a
Hindu, Muhammadan or Buddhist), so that she shall not
have power during her marriage to transfer or charge the
same or her beneficial interest therein."
"11. Restriction repugnant to interest created.--
Where, on a transfer of property, an interest therein is
created absolutely in favour of any person, but the terms of
the transfer direct that such interest shall be applied or
enjoyed by him in a particular manner, he shall be entitled to
receive and dispose of such interest as if there were no such
direction."
6. It is clear from a reading of Sections 10 and 11 of the Act
that, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the stipulation in Ext.P1
Settlement Deed that the petitioner shall not be permitted to transfer
the property covered by that deed until she attains the age of 25 cannot
be binding on the petitioner. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed
and the 3rd respondent is directed to register any document presented in
respect of the property covered by Ext.P1 Settlement Deed subject to
compliance with usual formalities without in any manner being affected
by the fact that Ext.P1 contains a stipulation to the effect that the
petitioner will not be entitled to dispose of the property until she attains
the age of 25.
The writ petition is allowed in the manner indicated above.
sd/-
GOPINATH P.
JUDGE
acd
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16304/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit-P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.
2438 OF 2011 DATED 18-05-2011 OF
POTHENCODE SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE
Exhibit-P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.
KL01012507999/2023 DATED 15-05-2023 OF
ULIYAZHATHURA VILLAGE
Exhibit-P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INVITATION LETTER OF
THE MARRIAGE OF THE PETITIONER
Exhibit-P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT
DATED 17-04-2023
Exhibit-P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION LETTER
ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 24-04-
Exhibit-P6 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 09-05-2023
