Madras High Court
A.Karuppannan vs The District Registrar on 13 April, 2022
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 13.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
A.Karuppannan ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Registrar
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Singanallur,
Coimbatore District.
3. K.Palanisamy ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of order
dated 09.03.2022 in refusal number: RFL/Singanallur/16/2022 on the file of
2nd respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd
respondent to register and release the settlement deed dated 04.03.2022 to
the petitioner within stipulated time as fixed by this Court.
For Petitioner : M/S.K.Myilsamy
For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Special Government Pleader
1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for the issuance of a Writ of
of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records of order dated 09.03.2022
in refusal number: RFL/Singanallur/16/2022 on the file of 2nd respondent
and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register
and release the settlement deed dated 04.03.2022 to the petitioner within
stipulated time as fixed by this Court.
2. Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader
takes notice for the respondents. In view of the limited relief sought for in
this petition and on the consent expressed by the learned counsel appearing
on either side, this petition is taken up for final disposal.
3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner presented the
Settlement deed before the 2nd respondent for registration on 09.03.2022.
However, the said document was refused to be registered by the 2nd
respondent on the ground that original parent document was not annexed
along with the document which is presented for registration. Challenging the
same, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for the above
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
relief.
4. Though very many grounds have been raised, learned counsel for
the petitioner submitted that though the petitioner annexed the certified copy
of the parent document, even then the 2nd respondent refused to register the
document is not sustainable, the issue involved in the present case, is no
more res-integra. He further relied upon the decision of this Court in
W.P.(MD)No.19745 of 2020, order dated 11.02.2021. The relevant portion
of the above said order is extracted hereunder:-
"8.This Court is entirely in agreement with the submissions
made on behalf of the petitioner in this regard. The latest
decision of the learned Single Judge appears to have not
considered the implication of the Circular with reference to the
scheme of the relevant Act. On the other hand, the above three
decisions cited on behalf of the petitioner would certainly hold
the field and in which event, insistence on production of original
Title Deeds by the Registering Authority is without any authority
of law. The Circular issued by the Inspector General of
Registration, Chennai in this regard cannot have any sanctity,
unless the power of issuance of such Circular is authorized
under the provisions of the Act. This Court has consistently held
that no such power can be read into Act, in the absence of any
specific provisions and in that view of the matter, as rightly
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the subject
issue is no more res-integra. As far as the latest decision of the
learned Single Judge is concerned, being a kind of a contra
view, this Court is of the opinion that the order passed by the
learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.16768 of
2020, dated 26.11.2020 has not appreciated the provisions of
the Act, as the reasons of the learned Single Judge are contrary
to the well considered earlier Judgments of this Court. The
learned Judge has reasoned without any specific reference to the
scheme of the Act, which governs the registration."
5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents submits that the document presented by the petitioner was
rejected by the 2nd respondent on the ground that parent document was not
annexed along with the document.
6. In view of the decision of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.19745 of
2020, order dated 11.02.2021, makes it clear that, there is no need to
present the parent document, certified copy of the parent document is
sufficient to entertain the document for registration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
7. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed, the impugned order is
set aside and the 2nd respondent is directed to entertain the document
presented by the petitioner and pass appropriate orders within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, and the
petitioner is directed to pay requisite Stamp Duty and Registration Charges.
No costs.
13.04.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
jd/rap
To
1. The District Registrar
Coimbatore,
Coimbatore District.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Singanallur,
Coimbatore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
jd/rap
W.P.No.8997 of 2022
13.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
