C.Raju vs The Sub Registrar
2023 Latest Caselaw 8143 Mad

                                                                                          WP 7643 of 2023

                              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                               DATED: 12-07-2023

                                                     CORAM

                            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                               WP No.7643 of 2023
                                                     And
                                               WMP No.7802 f 2023


                C.Raju                                                  ... Petitioner


                                                          Vs.


                1.The Sub Registrar,
                  Udumalpet,
                  Tiruppur District.

                2.The Official Liquidator,
                  High Court,
                  Madras.                                               ... Respondents

                PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
                praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the
                records relating to the first respondent Refusal Check Slip dated 25.02.2023 in
                TP/144350324/2023 and quash the same and consequently direct the first
                respondent to file the Sale Certificate dated 10.11.2022 forwarded by the
                second            respondent   Official         Liquidator     inF.No.443/2001/AR-
                II/24Projects/Jallipatti dated 10.01.2023.


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                1/8
                                                                                             WP 7643 of 2023

                                        For Petitioner       : Mr.K.Sakthivel

                                        For Respondent-1 : Mr.R.Ramanlaal,
                                                           Additional Advocate General
                                                           Assisted by Mr.D.Ravichander,
                                                           Special Government Pleader.

                                        For Respondent-2 : The Official Liquidator,
                                                           High Court, Madras.



                                                         ORDER

The relief sought for in the present writ petition is to direct the first

respondent to file the copy of Sale Certificate No.19/2012 (DRT No.260/2001)

dated 01.08.2012, issued by the second respondent in favour of the petitioner,

in Book No.1, maintained in the office of the second respondent by making

necessary entries therein as per communication dated 01.08.2012 issued by the

second respondent to the first respondent.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that an application in

C.A.No.252 of 2022 in CP No.57 of 1998 was filed before the second

respondent-Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras and it was ordered. The

Sale Certificate was issued on 10.11.2022 relating to the subject property to an

extent of 12.40 acres of land situated at Venkitapuram Village, Udumalpet

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

WP 7643 of 2023

Taluk, Tiruppur District.

3. The petitioner states that the Sale Certificate is not registered by

the Sub Registrar, despite the fact that decree was passed by the Competent

Forum. Thus, the petitioner is constrained to move the present writ petition.

4. Under Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, the

Registration of Sale Certificate is an option and it is not compulsory. In such

circumstances, the Sale Certificate cannot be equated with the other documents,

which is to be registered compulsorily.

5. In this regard, the legal principles are settled in the case of

Cenney Hotels Pvt Ltd., through its Managing Director S.Venkatesh vs.

State of Tamil Nadu represented by Inspector General of Registration,

Santhome, Chennai-600 004 and others [2010 (4) CTC 802], wherein this

Court, in paragraph-14, observed as under:-

“14. A reading of the above judgment would reveal that the purchaser of a property by sale through Civil or Revenue Court has no disadvantage because of lack of registration in view of the fact that under Section 17(2)(xii) of the Registration Act, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP 7643 of 2023

Certificate of Sale is not a compulsory registrable document and consequently, the transfer of title in his favour will not be vitiated by non-registration. But so far as the certificate issued by the Authorised Officer is concerned, it cannot be equated with the certificate issued by the Revenue or Civil Court. As contended by the learned Counsel for the Petitioner, the nomenclature given to the document issued by the Authorised Officer may not be relevant for giving exemption from paying the stamp duty since the Sale Certificate issued by the Authorised Officer will not be covered by Article 18 of Schedule I of the Stamp Act. In my considered opinion, the judgment delivered by this Court in In Re, The Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras, 2010 (2) CTC 113 by considering the earlier judgments, has set forth the correct position of law. In view of the above, I do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the 1st Respondent.

In fine, the Writ Petition fails and the same is dismissed. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.”

6. Section 89(4) of the Registration Act also would not apply in

view of the fact that the Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras cannot be

considered as a Competent Authority/Revenue Officer for the purpose of

forwarding the Sale Certificate for registration by the Sub Registrar concerned. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP 7643 of 2023

Thus, the sale by the Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras is unconnected

with the Sale Certificate, which is to be forwarded by the Revenue Authority to

the Sub Registrar.

7. Section 23 of the Indian Stamp Act, deals with conveyance and

the said provision would be applicable in respect of the facts and circumstances

of the case. This apart, the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority and Inspector

General of Registration issued a Circular in Letter No.52070/C2/2011 dated

27.10.2011, categorically explaining these situations and more specifically, in

respect of the Sale Certificate issued by the Official Liquidator, High Court,

Madras.

8. Therefore, the Sale Certificate issued by the Official Liquidator,

High Court, Madras, is not considered as a document, which is to be registered

by the Sub Registrar and it is only an optional registration and hence, a separate

stamp duty and registration fee are to be paid by the person, who seeks for

registration under the provisions of the Registration Act.

9. This being the position, the petitioner, if at all, ready and willing

to go for registration, he has to comply with the provisions of the Registration https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

WP 7643 of 2023

Act as well as the Circular issued by the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority

and Inspector General of Registration on 27.10.2011. In other words, the

petitioner has to pay the stamp duty and the registration charges, as applicable,

for registration.

10. With the abovesaid clarifications, the writ petition stands

dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the

connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

12-7-2023 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No Speaking order/Non-Speaking order Neutral Citation : Yes/No Svn

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

WP 7643 of 2023

To

1.The Sub Registrar, Udumalpet, Tiruppur District.

2.The Official Liquidator, High Court, Madras.

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

WP 7643 of 2023

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM., J

Svn

WP 7643 of 2023

12-07-2023

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