Madras High Court
Karunaiyammal vs The Inspector General Of ... on 26 October, 2022
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 26.10.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
And
W.M.P.No.9131 of 2020
Karunaiyammal ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Foreshore Estate,
Chennai – 600 028.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Bhavani,
Erode District.
3.Radha Alias Pavalakodi
4.S.Pooviniyal
5.Minor S.Pavananth
Rep. by next friend guardian mother
Radha Alias Pavalakodi
(R3 to R5 impleaded vide order dated
23.06.2021 made in WMP.11177/2020
in WP.7762/2020 by VBDJ) ... Respondents
Prayer:
Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
file of the second respondent in Refusal No.RFL/Bhavani/7/2020 dated
15.05.2020 and quash the same and consequentially direct the second
respondent to register and return document of the petitioner
corresponding to Refusal No.RFL/Bhavani/7/2020.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Guruprasad
For Respondents : Mr.G.Krishna Raja for R1 and R2
Additional Government Pleader
Mr.S.Bharanidharan for R3 to R5
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking issuance of
Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records on the file of
the second respondent in Refusal No.RFL/Bhavani/7/2020 dated
15.05.2020 and quash the same and consequentially direct the second
respondent to register and return document of the petitioner
corresponding to Refusal No.RFL/Bhavani/7/2020.
2.The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner presented a
document before the second respondent for registration. However, the
second respondent issued the impugned refusal check slip refusing to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
register the same on the ground of non production of original parent
document. Hence, this petition.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that for registering a settlement deed, original parent document is not
necessary and certified copy of the parent document is sufficient. The
learned counsel further submitted that the issue arises in the present
case has already been settled by the Madurai Bench of this Court in its
decision made in W.P.(MD) No.19745 of 2020 dated 11.02.2021.
4.The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents 1 and 2 submitted that since the petitioner did not
produce the original parent document while presenting the settlement
deed for registration, the second respondent issued the impugned
refusal check slip.
5.Heard the arguments advanced on either side and perused the
materials available on record.
6.The issue involved in the present writ petition is covered by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
the decision of the Madurai Bench of this Court made in W.P.(MD)
No.19745 of 2020 dated 11.02.2021, the relevant portion of which
reads 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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
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.''
7.The above decision makes it clear that certified copy of the
parent document is sufficient to entertain the document for
registration. However, perusal of the impugned order reveals that the
petitioner has not even annexed the certified copy of the parent
document and without doing so, presenting the document for
registration is not sustainable.
8.In view of the above, this Court grants liberty to the petitioner
to re-present the settlement deed along with certified copy of the
parent document. If such document is represented, the second
respondent shall entertain the document and pass appropriate orders
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
without referring to the order impugned in this writ petition and
subject to payment of necessary stamp duty and registration charges.
9.With the above observations and liberty, this writ petition is
dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous
petition is closed.
26.10.2022
pri
Speaking Order/ Non Speaking Order
Index: Yes/ No
Internet: Yes/ No
To
1.The Inspector General of Registration,
No.100, Santhome High Road,
Foreshore Estate,
Chennai – 600 028.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office,
Bhavani,
Erode District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
pri
W.P.No.7762 of 2020
And
W.M.P.No.9131 of 2020
26.10.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
