Madras High Court
K.Badrinarayanan vs The Joint Sub Registrar No on 20 July, 2023
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 20.07.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
K.Badrinarayanan : Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Joint Sub Registrar No.1,
Sub Registration Office,
Court Campus,
Contonment, Trichy-620001.
2.N.Muthulakshmi
3.N.Meena
4.Nalini Arulmozhi
5.L.S.Vadivel @ L.Senthil Vadivel
6.L.Chidambaram @ Kittu
7.Muthiah
8.Umayal
1/8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
9.C.N.Meenakshi
10.CT.Senthilnathan Chettiar : Respondents/Respondents
Prayer:
Writ Appeal has been filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set
aside the order, dated 21.02.2023 made in W.P.(MD)No.1793 of 2003
insofar as suo-motu impleading of the respondents 2 to 10 in the writ
petition and directing the first respondent to hear them before registering
the preliminary decree presented by the petitioner for registration, by
issuing notice to them.
For Appellant : Mr.K.K.Senthil
For R1 : Mr.M.Lingadurai
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY, J.
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single
Judge of this Court, dated 21.02.2023 in W.P.(MD)No.1793 of 2023. In
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
the said writ petition, the appellant had challenged the refusal check slip
issued by the first respondent/Joint Sub Registrar No.1, Trichy, dated
13.01.2023, whereby, his request to register the preliminary decree dated
22.02.1950 made in O.S.No.224 of 1948 was refused. The learned Single
Judge after considering the issues raised by the petitioner and
considering the circular dated 29.06.2022 issued by the Inspector
General of Registration, held that the reason set out in the refusal check
slip is unsustainable and set aside the check slip and permitted the
appellant to re-present his document for registration and further, directed
that upon re-presentation thereof the first respondent/Joint Sub Registrar
No.1 to issue notice to all the private respondents herein and to hear both
sides and to take a call in the matter. The learned Single Judge also made
it clear that merely because the impugned refusal check slip has been set
aside and the matter remitted back, it does not mean that the first
respondent/Joint Sub Registrar No.1 has to automatically register the
same, but to consider all the contentions of the parties and decide the
issue.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
2. Eventhough the appellant herein succeeded in the writ petition,
he has however filed this appeal aggrieved by the portion of the order, by
which, the learned Single Judge has directed the private respondents also
to be heard in the matter.
3. Mr.K.K.Senthil, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant would submit that when preliminary decree is a document,
which is registrable at the instance of the appellant, when third parties
have created encumbrances in the property in violation of the preliminary
decree, there is no ground for the Joint Sub Registrar No.1 to dispute
about the same and there is no scope for any enquiry to be conducted. He
would further submit that in any event, the hearing of the private
respondents in the matter was not necessary.
4. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions
made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and also to the
submissions made by Mr.M.Lingadurai, learned Special Government
Pleader appearing on behalf of the first respondent. There can be no
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
quarrel over the proposition that the Joint Sub Registrar No.1 can refuse
to reject the document if only, it is within the parameters or the grounds
on which, he is entitled to refuse. But that does not mean that the private
respondents, who also have a conflicting interest in respect of the subject
matter should not be heard at all in determining the question. Especially
in the facts and circumstances of the instant case, where the preliminary
decree of the year 1950 is now sought to be registered by the appellant.
Therefore, there may be any number of contentions which can be brought
in by the parties and there may be several facts, which the private
respondents may bring them to the notice of the Joint Sub Registrar No.1
which would be relevant for the Joint Sub Registrar No.1 to decide.
Therefore, only because the learned Single Judge found that the reasons
mentioned in the refusal check slip that there are other properties which
are also beyond the territorial jurisdiction of the Joint Sub Registrar No.1
covered in the preliminary decree may not by itself justify the appellant
to get the document registered. All the other aspects have to be looked
into by the Joint Sub Registrar No.1 and therefore, the learned Single
Judge has rightly remitted the matter back to the first respondent and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
while doing so, had directed the private respondents also to be heard. In
the facts and circumstances of the case, when the appellant is seeking to
register a decree of Court passed in the year 1950, no exception can be
taken for the exercise of the discretion by the learned Single Judge to
permit the Joint Sub Registrar No.1/first respondent to issue notice to all
the persons interested in respect of the property and conduct an enquiry
before taking a decision.
5. In the result, this writ appeal fails and accordingly, it is
dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
(S.S.S.R.,J.) & (D.B.C.,J)
20.07.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index:Yes/No
Index:Yes/No
sji
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
To
The Joint Sub Registrar No.1,
Sub Registration Office,
Court Campus,
Contonment, Trichy-620001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
AND
D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J.
sji
WRIT APPEAL(MD)No.1111 of 2023
20.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
