Madras High Court
K.Saravanan vs The Sub Registrar on 2 August, 2024
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
W.P.No.22325 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.08.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.22325 of 2024
K.Saravanan .. Petitioner
Versus
The Sub Registrar,
Thammampatti, No.285, Udayarpalayam,
Thammampatti, Salem District-636 113. .. Respondent
Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records
and the order of the respondent in Refusal Check Slip in Refusal No.RFL/
THAMMAMPATTI/35/2024 dated 15.7.2024 issued to the Petitioner and
quash the same as illegal and direct the respondent to register the sale deed
dated 12.07.2024 executed by the Petitioner without insisting him to
produce the original Settlement Deed dated 19.11.2003 and accept the
certified copy of the same, if it is otherwise in order.
For Petitioner : Mr.J.Antony Jesus
For Respondent : Mr.Stalin Abhimanyu
Additional Government Pleader
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
With the consent of both sides, this main Writ Petition itself is taken
up for final disposal at the admission stage.
2. This writ petition is filed to quash the impugned Refusal Check
Slip in Refusal No.RFL/THAMMAMPATTI/35/2024 dated 15.7.2024 issued
to the Petitioner as illegal and direct the respondent to register the sale deed
dated 12.07.2024 executed by the Petitioner without insisting him to
produce the original Settlement Deed dated 19.11.2003 and accept the
certified copy of the same, if it is otherwise in order.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Additional
Government Pleader appearing for the respondent and perused the materials
available on record.
4. The case of the petitioner is that petitioner's grandfather viz., Muthu
Gounder was the absolute owner of the property to an extent of 0.25.5 ares
4.00 hectares in S.Nos.119/10C, 119/11B and 119/12B in Thammampatti
village Gengavalli Taluk, Salem District vide sale deed dated 09.11.1964
registered as Document No.2627/1964 on the file of Sub Registrar,
Gengavali. After demise of petitioner's grandfather, the petitioner's father
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
viz., Kandasamy and grandmother viz., Palaniammal had executed a
Settlement Deed dated 19.11.2003 in favour of the petitioner, registered as
document No.1238/2003 on the file of the respondent and has also been
granted patta in Patta No.1717. As the said original settlement deed dated
19.11.2003 in favour of the petitioner was missing, he had lodged a
complaint before the Thalaivasal Police Station and had obtained Non
Traceable Certificate. The petitioner had executed a sale deed dated
12.07.2024 in favour of Krishnan and Selvaraj and presented the same for
registration before the respondent on 15.07.2024. The petitioner has also
paid stamp duty of Rs.8,99,000/- as per direction of the respondent. Though
he had produced the certified copy of the said settlement deed, the
respondent refused to register the sale deed executed by the petitioner by
issuing impugned refusal check slip. Challenging the same, the present
Writ Petition has been filed.
5. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the
parent document had been missing and hence, he is not able to produce the
same before the registering authorities and thereby, he had produced the non
traceable certificate obtained from Thalaivasal Police Station and the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
certified copy of the said settlement deed for registration.
6. The petitioner has challenged the Refusal Check Slip issued by the
respondent. As the order is against the judgment of this Court, no counter is
required.
7.It is relevant to note that this Court, in the case of Federal Bank v
Sub Registrar, reported in 2023 (2) CTC 289, has held that Sub Rule XX of
Rule 162 has no statutory backing. The said order has been followed by a
Division Bench of this Court in the case of M. Ariyanatchi v Inspector
General made in W.A.(MD).No. 856 of 2023, dated 27.06.2023, wherein,
the Division Bench of this Court has held that, for instance, the original
document is held by one co-owner, the Sub-Registrar can always take an
undertaking or a declaration in the form of an affidavit from the vendors to
the effect that the original document is with the said person and register the
document. Hence, the Sub-Registrar cannot refuse to register a document
merely because the original parent deed has not been produced. In such
view of the matter, the impugned refusal slip has to be set aside.
8. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned refusal
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
slip of the respondent 15.07.2024 stands quashed and the respondent is
directed to register the sale deed dated 15.07.2024 executed by the
petitioner in favour of Krishnan and Selvaraj within a period of fifteen days
from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs.
02.08.2024
raa
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
To
The Sub Registrar,
Thammampatti, No.285, Udayarpalayam,
Thammampatti, Salem District-636 113.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
raa
02.08.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
