Madras High Court
P.S.Sivasubramani vs The District Registrar on 1 February, 2021
W.P.No.418 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01.02.2021
CORAM : JUSTICE N.SESHASAYEE
W.P.No.418 of 2021
P.S.Sivasubramani ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar
District Registration Office
Karungalpayalam
Erode Town
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar
Registering Officer
Kodumudi SRO
Erode District. ... Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus calling for the
records relating to the impugned order made in Refusal Check Slip in
RFL/Kodumudi/4/2020 dated 03.11.2020 passed by the second
respondent, quash the same and consequently, directing the second
respondent to register the compromise decree dated 03.01.2020 made in
O.S.No.986 of 2019 on the file of the Ld. First Additional Sub Court,
Erode.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.P.No.418 of 2021
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Manokaran
For Respondents : Mr.T.M.Pappiah
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The petitioner approached the Sub Registrar, Kodumudi, Erode District /
2nd respondent to register the compromise decree in O.S.No.986 of 2019
dated 03.01.2020, but it was presented well beyond the time for
registering the documents, and on this ground, the Sub-Registrar has
issued a check slip dated 03.11.2020 indicating that the document was
belatedly presented for registration.
2. Heard Mr.N.Manokaran, learned counsel for the petitioner and
Mr.T.M.Pappiah, learned Special Government Pleader for the
respondents, and perused the documents.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this
Court in a judgment of this Court in K.Dhayanidhi vs. State of Tamil
Nadu [2020 (2) TNCJ 737(Mad)], wherein, the Court has held, after
relying on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.418 of 2021
S.Sarvothaman v. The Sub Registrar at Oulgaret, Puducherry
[ 2019(3)MLJ 517 = AIR 2019 Mad 125] that registering a decree of the
Court is an optional registration and hence, the limitation prescribed
under Sections 23 and 25 of the Act, would not apply.
4. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents would submit that the Registration Act gives exception in
the document and hence, the Sub-Registrar has refused to register the
document.
5. The law declared by the Division Bench of this Court in
S.Sarvothaman case cited supra, has settled the issue. The registration
of a decree is only optional under Section 17(2) of the Registration Act,
and therefore, the limitation prescribed under Section 23 of the Act, and
the power to condone the delay after four months as provided under
Section 25 of the Act, may not apply. There is however one exception to
the rule in that, as per Section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act, where in
a compromise decree, any properties other than the subject matter of the
suit (in which compromise decree is passed) is included, then such
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.418 of 2021
compromise decree has to be registered under Section 17(1) of the Act.
Therefore, except the category of compromise decrees as mentioned in
Section 17(2)(vi) of the Registration Act, for all other categories of
decrees, the Registering Authority has to register the same without
reference to any limitation.
6. So far as the decree required to register in the present petition is
concerned, the subject to what is herein above stated, the Registering
Authority is required to register the same. The petition is allowed in the
manner indicated. No costs.
01.02.2021
ds
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking order / Non-speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.418 of 2021
To:
1.The District Registrar
District Registration Office
Karungalpayalam
Erode Town
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar
Registering Officer
Kodumudi SRO
Erode District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.418 of 2021
N.SESHASAYEE.J.,
ds
W.P.No.418 of 2021
01.02.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
