Madras High Court
K.S.Rani vs The District Registrar on 14 August, 2023
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 14.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
1.K.S.Rani
2.T.Kalaivani ...Petitioners
Vs.
1.The District Registrar,
District Registrar Office,
Rengampalayam,
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office, Bhavani,
Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District.
3.Kuppammal
4.K.Ramu ..Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the 1st respondent to pass
appropriate order on the petitioner representation dt.10.04.2023 and cancel
the Sale Deed Document No.103/2011 dt.19.01.2022 on the file of the 2nd
respondent.
1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
For Petitioners : Mr.A.K.Samy
For Respondents 1 & 2 : Mr.D.Ravichander,
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first
respondent to pass appropriate orders on the petitioner's representation
dated 10.04.2023 and cancel the Sale Deed dated 19.01.2011 in Document
No.103/2011 on the file of the second respondent.
2. The petitioners submitted a complaint under section 77A of the
Registration Act to cancel the sale deed dated 19.01.2011 vide document
No.103 of 2011.
3. In respect of the documents registered prior to the insertion of
Section 77A in the Registration Act, the parties have to approach the
competent civil court of law. The amendment has been made prospectively
and therefore, the documents registered long before cannot be cancelled in
exercise of powers conferred under section 77A of the Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
4. The principles in this regard were considered by this court in
W.P.No.19239 of 2023 dated 25.07.2023 and the relevant paragraphs are
extracted hereunder:
“4. Without going into the allegations of fraud or
impersonation, this Court has to consider the
repercussions in the event of conducting summary
proceedings for the purpose of cancelling the
documents registered long back. The amendment was
made under the Tamil Nadu Act 41 of 2022 with effect
from 16.08.2022 and accordingly, Section 77A was
inserted. The provision is ambiguous with reference to
its retrospective application. The consequence of
retrospective application is to be considered by the
Courts. If unguided powers are provided to the District
Registrars to cancel the documents, irrespective of the
time of registration, the same would result in an
anomalous situation where the documents registered
several decades back also may be the subject matter for
cancellation under Section 77A of the Act.
5. The legislative intention of the amendment and
insertion of Section 77A in the Act would not confer
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
powers for its retrospective application, so as to cancel
the documents registered several decades back. All
those documents which were registered long years back
were governed under the provisions of the Act and
those documents were either subjected to civil
proceedings before the Civil Court of law or criminal
proceedings or otherwise.
......
9. Therefore, necessarily, the Court has to form
an opinion that in respect of the documents falling
under Section 22B of the Act, if sought to be cancelled,
then the Registrar is empowered to cancel the
documents under Section 77A of the Act. In respect of
other documents registered prior to the amendment,
one has to understand that those documents are to be
dealt in accordance with the law prevailing at the time
of registration either by approaching the Civil Court of
law or otherwise. When all those documents registered
prior to the amendment of the year 2022 are subjected
to Section 77A of the Act, then this Court is afraid that
an anomalous situation would be created by
approaching the District Registrar for the purpose of
adjudication of disputed issues with reference to those
documents registered several years back. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
amendment effected from 16.08.2022 has not intended
to do so nor the provision expressly provides any such
retrospective application. Prior to amendment, Section
22A and Section 22B was not in force. Thus, Section
77A cannot have retrospective effect. In other words,
Section 77A must be read in conjunction with Section
22A and Section 22B of the Act. Insertion of all these
three Sections are to be understood holistically to avoid
any inorderliness.
10. Article 59 of the Limitation Act, 1963
stipulates that, to cancel or set aside any instrument or
decree for rescission of a contract, the period of
limitation is three years. Therefore, even for setting
aside an instrument or a decree or for rescission of a
contract the period of three years has been
contemplated under the Limitation Act, the documents
registered several years back or decades back cannot
be the subject matter for cancellation of those
documents under Section 77A of the Act.
....
14. In the present Writ Petition, disputed issues
exist between the parties. Even the second respondent
herein was a party respondent in yet another Writ
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
Petition filed by one Mr.T.Arockia Dass in W.P.No.754
of 2023, wherein this Court passed an order on
10.01.2023. Therefore, the dispute between the parties
cannot be resolved by way of summary proceedings
under Section 77A of the Act. Normally, amendments
under the Statutes are intended for prospective effect,
unless retrospective effect has been expressly made
under the amendment. Presumptive retrospective
implementation of the amendments in the Statutes
would cause larger repercussion and would result in
disastrous consequences. Lakhs and lakhs of documents
registered prior to the amendments will be placed for
adjudication before the Registrar to cancel those
documents on personal or on varieties of reasons.
Therefore, in the absence of any specific provision to
implement the amendment retrospectively, the power
conferred through amendment is to be exercised with
prospective effect with reference to the documents
registered subsequent to the amendment and insertion
of Sections 22A, 22B and 77A of the Act. Thus, the
petitioner as well as the complainant in the present
case have to redress their respective grievances before
the competent Civil Court of law.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
5. In view of the judgment cited supra, the petitioners are at liberty to
approach the competent civil court of law for the purpose of establishing
their case in the manner known to law.
6. With this liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
14.08.2023
nl
Index: Yes
Speaking Order
Neutral Citation: Yes
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
To
1.The District Registrar,
District Registrar Office,
Rengampalayam,
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Sub Registrar Office, Bhavani,
Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
nl
W.P.No.23922 of 2023
14.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
