Madras High Court
K.A.Manikantan vs The Sub Registrar on 28 April, 2022
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.04.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
K.A.Manikantan ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Sub Registrar,
Kundrathur Sub Registrar Office,
Sammandam Nagar Main Road,
Kundrathur, Chennai-600 069. ... Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to the
refusal check slip bearing No.RFL/Kundrathur/132022 dated 25.04.2022
issued by the respondent as illegal and quash the same and consequently
issue suitable direction, directing the respondent to register the Sale Deed
dated 18.04.2022 in application No.TP/117611642/2022 without insisting
to production of the original parent document and release the same to the
petitioner within the time fixed by this Court.
For petitioner : Mr.R.Jayaprakash
For Respondent : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
The petitioner has filed this petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus to call for the records relating to the refusal check slip bearing
No.RFL/Kundrathur/132022 dated 25.04.2022 issued by the respondent as
illegal and quash the same and consequently issue suitable direction,
directing the respondent to register the Sale Deed dated 18.04.2022 in
application No.TP/117611642/2022 without insisting to production of the
original parent document.
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 a
document on 22.04.2022 for executing Sale Deed in favour of
A.Narayanasamy, before the respondent. However, the said document was
refused to be registered by the respondent on the ground that parent
document was not annexed along with the document which is presented for
registration. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been filed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
by the petitioner for the above relief.
4. Though very many grounds have been raised, learned counsel for
the petitioner submits that though the petitioner annexed the certified copy
of the parent document, even then the 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
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
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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
sufficient to entertain the document for registration.
7. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed, the impugned order is set
aside and the 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.
28.04.2022
Index : Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
Anu
To
The Sub Registrar,
Kundrathur Sub Registrar Office,
Sammandam Nagar Main Road,
Kundrathur, Chennai-600 069.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
Anu
W.P.No.11158 of 2022
28.04.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
