Madras High Court
S.Ilayaraja vs The Join Sub Registrar No.I on 2 July, 2024
Author: N. Sathish Kumar
Bench: N. Sathish Kumar
WP.No.12257 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.07.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.12257 of 2024
S.Ilayaraja .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The Join Sub Registrar No.I,
Kallakurichi.
2. Murugesan .. Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus Calling for the records of
the 1st respondent in his proceedings in Na.Ka.No.2157-2/ a.Pa.Pi/ 2023 dated
22.01.2024 and quash the same and thereby direct the 1st respondent to
register the sale deed dated 2.5.2023 in P5/ 2023 and release the same to the
petitioner forthwith.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Suresh
For Respondents : Mr.M.Shajahan
Special Government Pleader – R1
Mr.R.Bharathkumar - R2
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ORDER
1/6
WP.No.12257 of 2024
Since, no adverse Order has been passed against the second respondent,
notice to him is dispensed with. With the consent of both sides, this Writ
Petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage itself.
2. Challenging the impugned proceedings of the first respondent in
Na.Ka.No.2157-2/ a.Pa.Pi/ 2023 dated 22.01.2024 and for directing the first
respondent to register the sale deed dated 02.05.2023 in P5/ 2023 and release
the same to the petitioner forthwith, the present Writ Petition has been filed.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and perused the
materials available on record.
4. The case of the petitioner is that he had purchased the subeject
property for valuable consideration on 02.05.2023 and he is in possession and
enjoyment of the property. Originally, the sale deed presented by the petitioner
was refused to be registered on the ground that a protest petition given by the
second respondent at the relevant point of time. Thereafter, it is the case of the
second respondent that there is a dispute in the time and the vendor of the writ
petitioner did not have any title over the property. Hence, this Court by an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/6
WP.No.12257 of 2024
Order dated 27.07.2023, directed the petitioner to approach the Civil Court.
As against which the petitioner had preferred an appeal in W.A.No.3053 of
2023 and the Division Bench of this Court by an Order dated 07.11.2023 has
directed the appellant to represent the document before the respondent and if
more than one document is registered, with regard to the same property,
appropriate decision can be taken by the authority. When the petitioner
presented the document for registration, the same was refused to be registered
citing civil dispute. Challenging the same, the present Writ Petition has been
filed.
5. It is relevant to note that as far as registration is concerned, the
title cannot be decided by the Sub Registrar. Rights of parties will be governed
based on the their title and the earlier documents. In such view of the matter,
merely on the basis of some protest petition, the document cannot be refused to
be registered. This as pect has been elaborately dealth by this Court in
Subramani Vs. 1.The Sub-Registrar, Office of the Sub-Registrar,
Rasipuram. 2. The Inspector General of Registration, Chennai
[W.P.No.11056 of 2024, dated 26.04.2024] wherein it has been held as
follows :
“In a judgment of this Court in the case of Abdullasa
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/6
WP.No.12257 of 2024
v Inspector General of Registration reported in 2021 2 CWC
451, this Court held that the Registrar cannot refuse to register
the document on the basis of objections raised by a rival
claimant, who has a different source of title. Similarly, the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Satya Pal Anand v. State of
M.P., reported in (2016) 10 SCC 767 has held that an enquiry
into the title of the executant is beyond the powers of the Sub-
Registrar. Therefore, in view of the law declared in this regard,
merely on the ground of protest petitions and objections raised
by some third party, the document cannot be refused to be
registered.”
In view of the above substntive provision of law, the documents cannot be
refused to be registered on the basis of a protest petition. However, it is made
clear that on the basis of registration, the petitioner cannot make in road into
the property without established his title in a Civil Court.
6. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned Order
passed by the first respondent dated 22.01.2024 is quashed and the first
respondent is directed to register the sale deed dated 02.05.2023 presented by
the petitioner within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4/6
WP.No.12257 of 2024
of this Order. No costs.
02.07.2024
vrc
Index :Yes/No
Internet :Yes/No
Neutral Citation : Yes/No
To,
The Join Sub Registrar No.I,
Kallakurichi.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5/6
WP.No.12257 of 2024
N. SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vrc
02.07.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
