Madras High Court
S. Selvi vs District Registrar on 24 August, 2021
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.08.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
W.M.P.Nos.18805 and 18810 of 2021
S. Selvi ... Petitioner
Versus
1. District Registrar,
Cuddalore District.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Kullanchavadi SRO Office,
Cuddalore District.
3. P. Sudaharsan ...Respondents
This Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining
to the impugned order of refusal check slip issued by the 2 nd respondent
reference no. RFL/Kullanchavadi/14/2021 Sub-Registrar, Kullanchavadi
dated 29.07.2021 in refusing to register the power of attorney dated
29.07.2021 and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, opposed to statute, rules
framed thereunder, without jurisdiction and violative of audi alteram partem
and further direct the 2nd respondent to register the said power of attorney,
within a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.
1/8
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
For Petitioner : Mr. R. Veeramani
For R1 and R2 : Mr. K. M. D. Muhilan
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order of
refusal check slip issued by the 2nd respondent reference no.
RFL/Kullanchavadi/14/2021 Sub-Registrar, Kullanchavadi dated
29.07.2021 in refusing to register the power of attorney dated 29.07.2021
and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, opposed to statute, rules framed
thereunder, without jurisdiction and violative of audi alteram partem and
further direct the 2nd respondent to register the said power of attorney, within
a time frame as may be fixed by this Court.
2.According to the petitioner, a suit in O.S.No.827 of 1993 was filed
on the file of District Munsiff Court, Panruti which was decreed as prayed
for. Being a co-sharer, the petitioner filed Execution Petition in E.P.No.10
of 2013 and got her share of the property measuring 2.86 acres of
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
agricultural land in Survey No.41/2B at Sivananthipuram Village.
Subsequently, she also got transferred patta in her name and mutation of
revenue records was also effected. Thereafter, the petitioner decided to
appoint a Power Agent to effectively manage protect the property and hence
she appointed one Mr.S.G.M. Bhubesh by executing a power of attorney in
his favour and it was presented for registration on 29.07.2021 in the office
of the first respondent. However, the second respondent issued a refusal
check slip stating that there is a civil suit pending in O.S.No.226 of 2019 on
the file of the Principal District Judge, Cuddalore wherein the respondents 1
and 2 were also made as parties. Therefore, citing the same, the second
respondent refused to register the power of attorney. Aggrieved by the said
refusal, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition.
3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
impugned order passed by the second respondent refusing to registering the
power of attorney presented by the petitioner is contrary to the provisions of
the Registration Act and Rules made there under. He would submit that the
civil suit pending in O.S.No.226 of 2019 was filed by the third respondent
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
by colluding with his son and it has nothing to do with the petitioner's right
over the subject matter in respect of which, she seeks to appoint power of
attorney on her behalf. He would also submit that the petitioner wants to
appoint power of attorney in respect of her share which was already
adjudicated in a civil suit and delivered to her by the civil Court in execution
proceedings. Therefore, there is no justification on the part of the second
respondent to refuse the registration of the deed of power of attorney. Hence,
the learned counsel seeks to quash the impugned order and to direct the
second respondent to register the document.
4.On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate appearing for
the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that as against the impugned order,
the petitioner is having efficacious remedy by way of appeal under Section
72 of the Registration Act and the District Registrar is the competent
authority to look into the matter and pass appropriate orders therein in
accordance with law. However, without exhausting such remedy, the
petitioner has filed the present writ petition which is not maintainable and
the petitioner may be directed to work out her remedy before the competent
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
authority by way of appeal.
5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned
Government Advocate for the respondents one and two and perused the
materials available on record.
6.It is not in dispute that the petitioner has got the property through
civil Court's judgment and decree and delivery of the subject property was
done by the bailiff in pursuance of the orders of the Executing Court.
Subsequently, the petitioner also got patta transferred in her name and
necessary entires were effected in revenue records. Therefore, the petitioner
is the absolute owner of the subject property. In order to manage and protect
the subject property, the petitioner thought it fit to appoint one Mr.S.G.M.
Bhubesh as her Power Agent and accordingly she executed power of
attorney in his favour and presented the same before the second respondent.
But the same was refused by issuing a refusal check slip dated 29.07.2021
by the second respondent citing that a civil suit in O.S.No.226 of 2019 was
pending. As rightly contended by the petitioner, the reason cited by the
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
second respondent for refusing registration of the document has no legal
basis and the same cannot be sustained. However, it is pertinent to note that
as against the order of the Sub-Registrar, the petitioner is having efficacious
appeal remedy before the District Registrar, the first respondent herein
under 72 of the Registration Act.
7. Section 72 provides for, "Appeal to the Registrar from orders of
Sub- Registrar refusing registration on ground other than denial of
execution"; the appeal is required to be preferred within 30 days from the
date of the order and the Registrar is empowered to reverse or alter the order
appealed against; if the Registrar directs the documents to be registered, the
Sub Registrar is mandated to obey the same and register the document.
8.In view of the above, the petitioner is now directed to make a
representation by way of appeal before the first respondent/District Registrar
under Section 72 of the Registration Act as against the impugned order of
the second respondent/Sub-Registrar within a period of two weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such appeal being filed by the
petitioner, the first respondent is directed to consider the same without
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
insisting upon the limitation aspect since the petitioner has filed the present
writ petition and pursuing the matter before this Court, and pass appropriate
orders in accordance with law on merits after affording opportunity to the
petitioner within a period of eight weeks thereafter.
9. With the above observation, the writ petition is disposed of. No
Costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
24.08.2021
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
gbi
To
1. The District Registrar,
Cuddalore District
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Kullanchavadi SRO Office,
Cuddalore District.
http://www.judis.nic.in
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
V. BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.,
gbi
W.P.No.17653 of 2021
24.08.2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
