Madras High Court
Rajendran vs The District Registrar on 22 June, 2022
1 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.06.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P.(MD)No.11863 of 2022
Rajendran ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The District Registrar,
Department of Registration,
Madurai North,
Madurai.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Department of Registration,
Y.Othakadai,
Rajagampeeram,
Madurai District. ... 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 pertaining to the impugned
order/check slip passed by the second respondent in
RFL/Othakadai/4/2022 dated 06.05.2022 and quash the same
and consequently direct the second respondent to register the
settlement deed dated 06.05.2022 and release the same within
a period that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.N. Jeyaram Sidharth
For Respondents: Mr. J.K. Jayaseelan,
Government Advocate.
***
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
2 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel on either side.
2. The petitioner is an 84 years old senior citizen. He
executed a settlement deed settling the properties in question
in favour his daughter. However, the original title documents
are not available. The petitioner is not able to lay hands
thereon. He has given a complaint in this regard. The
petitioner is ready to make paper publication in some Tamil
daily having local circulation. The petitioner through his
counsel informs the Court that he has not encumbered the
property and he is willing to file an affidavit to that effect
before the registering authority.
3. Now the only question that arises for consideration
is whether the registration authority can decline to register
the settlement deed on the ground that the parent documents
have not been produced or the no objection certificates have
not been produced. The issue on hand is no longer res integra.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relies the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
order dated 11.02.2021 made in W.P.(MD)No.19745 of
2020 (Sivanadiyan V. The Sub Registrar, Pudukottai
District). Paragraph Nos.8, 9 and 10 of the said decision is as
follows:-
“ 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 the Act, in the absence of any specific
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
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.
9.In fact, in one of the judgments cited by
the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned
Additional Government Pleader for the respondent
himself has conceded the legal position. In that
view of the matter, the reliance placed by the
Department on the latest order of the learned
single Judge needs to be held as not valid.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
10.In the above circumstances, the
impugned refusal slip in R.F.L/1, Joint Sub-
Registrar, Pudukottai /167/2020 dated 10.12.2020
is hereby set aside. The respondents are directed
to register the documents presented by the
petitioner for registration, if the document is
otherwise in order, without insisting on the
production of original parent document, in terms of
the law laid down by this Court in the three
decisions as cited supra.”
4. Respectfully following the said order, the
impugned refusal cheque slip is quashed. The undertaking
given by the petitioner through counsel is recorded. The
second respondent is directed to register the petition
mentioned settlement deed subject to the fulfillment of the
usual formalities. This writ petition stands allowed. No costs.
22.06.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
PMU
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6 W.P.(MD)NO.11863 OF 2022
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
PMU
To:
1. The District Registrar,
Madurai North,
Madurai.
2. The Sub-Registrar,
Y.Othakadai,
Rajagampeeram,
Madurai District.
W.P.(MD)No.11863 of 2022
22.06.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
