Siva Sakthivel vs The Sub-Registrar
2023 Latest Caselaw 10110 Mad

    2023:MHC:3980


                                                                                      W.P.No.23364 of 2023


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                      DATED : 10.08.2023

                                                           CORAM :

                                   THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M. SUBRAMANIAM

                                                      W.P.No.23364 of 2023

                     Siva Sakthivel                                               .. Petitioner

                                                            Versus


                     The Sub-Registrar,
                     Kammapuram Sub Registrar Office,
                     Cuddalore District.                                          .. Respondent

                     Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
                     for issuance of writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
                     pertaining       to   the   Refusal      Check   Slip   in     refusal       number
                     RFL/Kammapuram/17/2023 dated 17.02.2023 and to quash the same as
                     illegal and incompetent and consequently direct the respondent to register
                     the settlement deed executed by the petitioner on 17.02.2023.


                                     For Petitioner            : Mr.T. Meganathan

                                     For Respondent            : Mr.D. Ravichander,
                                                                 Special Government Pleader


                     1/6


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                      W.P.No.23364 of 2023




                                                            ORDER

The Refusal Check Slip issued by the respondent returning the

document presented by the petitioner for registration is under challenge in

the present writ petition.

2.The petitioner states that his family is the absolute owner of the

property described in the present writ petition and his father filed second

appeal in SA.No.851/954 before the High Court of Madras and the

Judgment was also granted in his favour. The petitioner acquired the right

through his father and presented a settlement deed for registration. The

settlement deed was proposed to be registered in favour of the wife of the

petitioner. The document presented by the petitioner, was returned on the

ground that the Sub-Registrar is unable to trace the title with reference to

the Judgment passed by the High Court in the second appeal. The

interpretation offered by the Sub-Registrar in the impugned order is

untenable and beyond the scope of his powers conferred under the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.23364 of 2023

Registration Act. Admittedly, the second appeal was instituted by the father

of the writ petitioner Mr.Ramalingam and the Court passed the following

orders:

“57.In the result, it is held by this Court that the Appellant/Plaintiff is the owner of the suit properties viz., 1 to 4 items of A schedule properties and the B schedule property and accordingly, the relief of Declaration is granted. Since, the Respondent/1st Defendant was found to be in possession of the suit properties, the Appellant/Plaintiff is not entitled to claim the relief of permanent injunction as prayed for by him in the Plaint, because of the simple reason that the Respondent/1st Defendant's Application in Tr.No.8/86 dated 06.08.1990 claiming cultivating Tenants Rights was pending before the competent authority. Since the question whether the Respondent/1st Defendant was a cultivating Tenant or not was left open by this Court to be decided by the Competent Authority, the order 20 Rule 12 of Civil Procedure Code mesne profit proceedings were also left open. Viewed in that perspective, the Second Appeal is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.”

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.23364 of 2023

3.The said order has been further interpreted by the registering

authority which becomes unnecessary and beyond the scope of the powers

conferred under the Registration Act. Under Rule 55A of the Registration

rules, the registering authority is empowered to verify the original document

for the purpose of ascertaining the identity of the presenter of a document

but he cannot scrutinize the documents for the purpose of adjudication of

title. Thus, in the present case the order impugned is perverse and beyond

the scope of the provisions of the Registration Act.

4.Accordingly, the impugned Refusal Check Slip issued by the

respondent in the proceedings in RFL/Kammapuram/17/2023 dated

17.02.2023 is quashed. The respondent is directed to proceed with the

registration by following the procedure as contemplated and complete the

same within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

order.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.23364 of 2023

5.With the above direction, the writ petition stands allowed. No

costs.

                                                                                        10.08.2023
                     Index       : yes/no
                     Speaking order/Non-speaking order
                     Neutral Citation : yes/no
                     cse/veda

                     To

                     The Sub-Registrar,
                     Kammapuram Sub Registrar Office,
                     Cuddalore District.







https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                           W.P.No.23364 of 2023




                                  S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.

                                                    cse/veda




                                     W.P.No.23364 of 2023




                                                10.08.2023







https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis