Madras High Court
R.Mukthar Ahamed vs The State Of Tamilnadu on 9 August, 2023
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 09.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
and
W.M.P.No.22845 of 2023
R.Mukthar Ahamed ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamilnadu,
Rep. By its Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes and Registration Department,
Fort St.George, Secretariat,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 028.
3.The District Registrar,
Office of the District Registrar,
Gobichetipalayam – 638 452.
4.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Sub-registrar-Thalavadi,
Mysore Trunk Road,
Thalavadi,
Erode District.
5.The Tahsildhar,
Thalavadi Taluk,
Erode District.
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
6.Magbul Sheriff
7.Hussain Sheriff
8.Rahamath Sheriff
9.Langada @ Rahmath Sheriff
10.Peer Sheriff
11.Rajiya Begam
12.Kaleel Sheriff
13.Amanullah Sheriff
14.Archiya
15.Mubarauk
16.Aslam ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the order of the 3rd
Respondent in Na.Ka.No.1932/A3/2023 dated 15.05.2023, and consequently
direct the 3rd Respondent to cancel the registration of the Judgment and
decree dated 20.07.1995 in A.S.No.56 of 1993 in Doc.No.679 of 2023 dated
12.04.2023.
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Roshan Atiq
For Respondents 1 to 5 : Mr.D.Ravichander,
Special Government Pleader
Page 2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
ORDER
The order impugned dated 15.05.2023 rejecting the complaint of the
writ petitioner submitted under section 77A of the Registration Act is under
challenge in the present writ petition.
2. The petitioner states that in respect of the subject property, a decree
was passed in A.S.No.56 of 1993. The decree holder registered the said
decree as document No.679 of 2023 dated 12.04.2023. On account of the
registration of the decree, the petitioner is prevented from dealing with the
subject property and the petitioner accordingly, submitted an application
under section 77A of the Registration Act to cancel the document No.679 of
2023.
3. The District Registrar rejected the complaint mainly on the ground
that the decree issued by the competent civil court of law cannot be cancelled
by adjudicating the issues on merits. In other words, the authorities
competent found that they cannot interfere with the contents in the decree for
the purpose of conducting an enquiry so as to cancel the registration.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
4. No doubt, if there is any procedural violation in registering the
decree, that can be interfered with by the registering authority or by the
competent authority. However, the authorities under the Registration Act
cannot adjudicate the decree of the civil court on merits.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this
Court that another application was filed before the civil court by the
respondents 6 to 16 under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC. The said petition was
dismissed. Therefore, the decree granted in A.S.No.56 of 1993 is non
executable. If so, the petitioner is at liberty to register the said order passed
under Order 21 Rule 97 of CPC under the provisions of the Registration Act.
6. In this context, section 23 speaks about the time for presenting
documents and indicates that a copy of the decree or order may be presented
within four months from the date on which the decree or order was made or
where it is appealable within four months from the date on which it becomes
final.
7. Therefore, any order passed subsequent to the decree passed in
A.S.No.56 of 1993 is also registrable and thus, the petitioner is at liberty to
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
present the said order passed subsequently after the decree, for registration.
In such circumstances, the registering authority has to consider and register
the same in accordance with the provisions of the Registration Act.
8. However, this Court do not find any infirmity in respect of the
reasons stated in the impugned order and consequently, the impugned order
stands confirmed.
9. With these observations, the writ petition stands disposed of. No
costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
09.08.2023
nl
Index : Yes
Neutral Citation : Yes
Speaking order
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes and Registration Department,
Fort St.George, Secretariat,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Registration,
Santhome High Road,
Chennai – 600 028.
3.The District Registrar,
Office of the District Registrar,
Gopichetipalayam – 638 452.
4.The Sub-Registrar,
Office of the Sub-registrar-Thalavadi,
Mysore Trunk Road,
Thalavadi,
Erode District.
5.The Tahsildhar,
Thalavadi Taluk,
Erode District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
nl
W.P.No.23310 of 2023
09.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
