Madras High Court
Taj Nisha vs The Sub - Registrar on 9 September, 2022
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.09.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI
W.P.No. 24356 of 2022
Taj Nisha ... Petitioner
Vs.
The Sub - Registrar,
Office of the Sub Registrar,
Pammal,
Chennai District. ... 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
impugned refusal slip in Refusal No.RFL/PAMMAL/10/2022 dated
24.08.2022 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the
respondent to register the Power of Attorney presented by the petitioner for
registration without insisting for the production of original parent document.
For petitioner : Mr.R.Venkatraman
For Respondents : Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan
Special Government Pleader
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
ORDER
The petitioner has filed this petition to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the order of the respondent
dated 24.08.2022 in reference No. RFL/PAMMAL/10/2022 and quash the
same and direct the respondent to register the Power of Attorney presented by
the writ petitioner without insisting for the production of original parent
document.
2. Mr.Yogesh Kannadasan, learned Special Government Pleader takes
notice for the respondent. 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 24.08.2022 to register the Power of Attorney, 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
present Writ Petition has been filed 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 that no such power can be read into
Act, in the absence of any specific provisions and in that view of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
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
passsed 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
respondent 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 sufficient to
entertain the document for registration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
7. Accordingly, this 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.
09.09.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
tri
To
The Sub - Registrar,
Office of the Sub Registrar,
Pammal,
Chennai District
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.24356 of 2022
M.DHANDAPANI,J.
tri
W.P.No. 24356 of 2022
09.09.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
