Madras High Court
K.Karthikeyan vs The Sub Registrar on 27 October, 2021
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.10.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY
W.P(MD).Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD).Nos.15823 and 15827 of 2021
K.Karthikeyan ... Petitioner in W.P(MD).No.19054 of 2021
Hepzi ...Petitioner in W.P(MD).No.19062 of 2021
Vs.
The Sub Registrar,
Alangulam, Tenkasi District. ...Respondent in both cases
Prayer in W.P(MD).No.19054 of 2021: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for
the records of the impugned refusal check slip No.RFL/Alangulam/49/2021
dated 11.10.2021 on the file of the respondent and to quash the same and
further directing the respondent to receive and register the settlement deed
termed as family arrangement dated 11.10.2021 executed by the petitioner in
favour of the petitioner's only son Mr.Athiban Kuthalingam submitted for
registration with the respondent under Temporary No.TP/106135317/2021.
Prayer in W.P(MD).No.19062 of 2021: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of
the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned refusal check slip
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
No.RFL/Alangulam/50/2021 dated 11.10.2021 on the file of the respondent and
to quash the same and further directing the respondent to receive and register
the settlement deed termed as family arrangement dated 11.10.2021 executed
by the petitioner in favour of the petitioner's only son Mr.Athiban Kuthalingam
submitted for registration with the respondent under Temporary
No.TP/106130091/2021.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Prabhu Rajadurai
(In both cases)
For Respondent : Mr.K.S.Selva Ganesan
(In both cases) Counsel for State
COMMON ORDER
In both these writ petitions, refusal check slips are assailed. The
petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.19054 of 2021 is the husband of the petitioner in
W.P.(MD).No.19062 of 2021. In connection with the Rice Mill operated by
Mr.K.Karthikeyan (petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.19054 of 2021), a cash credit
facility was availed of from one S.A.Kannan. As security in respect thereof, a
Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 24.03.2017 (in W.P.(MD).No.
19062 of 2021) and Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds dated 26.10.2018
(in W.P.(MD).No.19054 of 2021) were executed by the respective petitioner in
favour of the lender/mortgagee.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
2.The respective petitioner submits that it was decided to settle the
relevant property in favour of the son of the petitioners, namely, Athiban
Kuthalingam. Accordingly, a settlement deed was executed and presented for
registration. By separate refusal check slips dated 11.10.2021, the request for
registration was refused.
3.The respective petitioner assails the separate refusal check slip on the
ground that the only reason stated therein is the non-production of the original
parent document. The respective petitioner points out that the non-production
of the original parent document is not a valid ground to refuse to register a
document.
4.Mr.K.S.Selva Ganesan, learned counsel for the State, accepts notice on
behalf of the sole respondent. He submits that the respondent may be directed
to reconsider the matter after providing a reasonable opportunity to the
mortgagee.
5.The respective petitioner has enclosed a copy of the relevant
Memorandum of Deposit of Title Deeds. The said document discloses that the
original title deeds were deposited with the mortgagee. It is stated by the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
respective petitioner that no separate loan agreement was executed in relation to
the loan. Loan agreements typically contain a clause restraining alienation of
the secured assets without the prior consent of the mortgagee. Although the
respective petitioner asserts that there is no separate loan agreement, this is an
aspect that should be ascertained by the respondent by issuing notice to the
mortgagee. The second aspect to be considered is whether the original title
deeds are with the mortgagee. If such is the case, it would explain the
non-production thereof by the respective petitioner. As held in several earlier
judgments, a request for registration should not be refused solely on the ground
of non-production of original parent documents. A person presenting a
document for registration may have legitimate reasons for non-production.
Therefore, the impugned order in the two writ petitions cannot be sustained.
The said orders are, therefore, quashed.
6.As a corollary, the matter is remitted for reconsideration by the
respondent. For such purpose, the respective petitioner is permitted to resubmit
the relevant document for registration. Such re-submission shall be done within
a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon
such re-submission, the respondent is directed to reconsider the request for
registration by providing a reasonable opportunity to the respective petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
and the mortgagee. In course of such inquiry, the respondent shall ascertain
whether the original documents are with the mortgagee and also whether the
terms and conditions of the loan agreements executed by and between the
respective petitioner and the mortgagee contain any restrictions on alienation
without the consent of the mortgagee. The respondent shall not go into the
liability of the respective petitioner to the mortgagee, which is a matter to be
decided in independent proceedings. After conducting an inquiry in the manner
aforesaid, the respondent is directed to either register the relevant documents or
issue a reasoned communication indicating the reasons for refusal to do so. In
either case, the entire process shall be concluded within a period of two (2)
months from the date of receipt of the resubmitted documents from the
respective petitioner.
7.W.P(MD).Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021 are disposed of on these terms
without any order as to costs. Consequently, W.M.P.(MD)Nos.15823 and 15827
of 2021 are closed.
27.10.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
sn/sji
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.P(MD)Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY, J.
sn/sji
Note : In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19
pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official
purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is
presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the
advocate/litigant concerned.
To
The Sub Registrar,
Alangulam, Tenkasi District.
W.P(MD).Nos.19054 and 19062 of 2021
and
W.M.P(MD).Nos.15823 and 15827 of 2021
27.10.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
