Madras High Court
A.K.C.Rajendran vs The District Registrar (Admn) on 6 October, 2021
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 06.10.2021
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
A.K.C.Rajendran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar (Admn),
Office of Registrar,
Nagapattinam.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Thiruthuraipoondi,
Thiruvarur District.
3.A.K.C.Ravindran
4.A.K.C.Devendran ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records of the 2nd respondent namely the Refusal Check Slip dated
07.09.2001 and quash the same and further direct the 2nd respondent to
register the final decree passed in I.A.No.88 of 2013 for O.S.No.25 of 2012
dated 04.02.2014 on the file of the Court of Principal District Judge,
Thiruvarur.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Muthukumar
For respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan for R1 and R2
Government Advocate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/8
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed for a certiorarified mandamus to
quash the order of the second respondent viz., the Refusal Check Slip dated
07.09.2001 and further direct the second respondent to register the Final
Decree dated 04.02.2014 passed in I.A.No.88 of 2013 in O.S.No.25 of 2012
passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Thiruvarur.
2.The case of the petitioner is that the respondents 3 and 4 are his
brothers and since they are parties to the decree, he made them as parties to
this writ petition and they are only formal parties herein and they cannot
have any objection for registration of the decree.
3.The petitioner submits that he instituted O.S.No.25 of 2012 before
the Principal District Judge, Thiruvarur for partition and separate possession
of his 1/3rd share in the suit properties against his brothers viz., the
respondents 3 and 4 herein and a preliminary decree for partition has been
passed on 30.04.2013 and pursuant to the said preliminary decree, he filed
I.A.No.88 of 2013 for passing Final Decree.
4.The petitioner further submits that the Trial Court appointed an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
Advocate Commissioner for suggesting mode of division of the properties,
the Advocate Commissioner filed his report and plan.
5.According to the petitioner, the learned Principal District Judge,
Thiruvarur passed a Final Decree in I.A.No.88 of 2013 in O.S.No.25 of
2012 on 04.02.2014, the said decree has become final as there is no appeal
filed against it.
6.The petitioner submits that he applied for a copy of the Final
Decree on 29.04.2014, the same was made ready on 05.05.2014 and
delivered to his counsel on 06.05.2014.
7.According to the petitioner, though Thiruvarur is a separate
Revenue District, there is no District Registrar for the said District and only
the first respondent herein has got jurisdiction as District Registrar for
Thiruvarur District and he presented the Final Decree for registration before
the second respondent, the second respondent did not entertain the same for
registration.
8.The petitioner submits that he filed a petition before the first
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
respondent on 15.07.2021, the first respondent vide his communication
dated 16.08.2021 informed him that the second respondent would take
appropriate decision with regard to registration.
9.The petitioner further submits that he was asked to submit a draft
document before the second respondent and accordingly, he presented the
same for registration and the second respondent vide impugned order dated
07.09.2021 refused to register the document on the ground that the
document in question viz., the Final Decree ought to have been presented
for registration within 4 months from the date of decree or at least within 4
months thereafter.
10.According to the petitioner, there is no limitation for presenting
the Court decree for registration, as registration of the Court decree is only
optional and not mandatory.
11.The petitioner submits that Courts have repeatedly held that no
Registering Authority shall refuse to register any Court decree on the
ground of limitation.
12.In support of his contentions, he relied upon a Division Bench
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
judgment of this Court in the case of Sarvothaman Vs. Sub Registrar
Oulgaret, Pondicherry reported in 2019 (3) MLJ 517 and would submit
that this Court has categorically held that the limitation prescribed in
Section 23 of the Registration Act, 1908 cannot apply to a Court decree and
also held that proviso to Section 23 of the Registration Act, 1908 does not
apply in so far as limitation is concerned for registration of Court decree
since it is not a compulsorily registrable document and this Court further
held that the limitation period prescribed in proviso to Section 23 of the Act
can only be treated as directory and therefore the mandatory requirement of
registration of document before 4 months as contemplated under Section 23
of the Act cannot be put against any party, who want to register the court
decree or order.
Relying upon the aforesaid judgment, the petitioner prayed for allowing this
writ petition.
13.The petitioner has no other alternative remedy except to approach
this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Hence, the writ
petition filed.
14.Heard, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 and perused the
materials available on record.
15.It is settled position of law that the Sub Registrar cannot compel
the petitioner to register the same within a period of four months and there
is no prohibition for register the same as this being a decree of the Court.
16.In view of the above and considering the submissions made by the
petitioner, this Court is inclined to set aside the Refusal Check Slip dated
07.09.2021 issued by the second respondent and the writ petition is allowed
by directing the respondents to register the decree dated 04.02.2014 passed
in I.A.No.88 of 2013 in O.S.No.25 of 2012 passed by the Principal District
Judge, Thiruvarur in accordance with law, within a period of 8 weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
06.10.2021
Index : yes/no
Internet : yes/no
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
pam
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
To
1.The District Registrar (Admn),
Office of Registrar,
Nagapattinam.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Thiruthuraipoondi,
Thiruvarur District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN. J,
pam
W.P.No.21546 of 2021
06.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
