Madras High Court
Cyriloose vs The District Registrar on 17 October, 2024
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
W.P(MD)No.24443 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.10.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.(MD)No.24443 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.20768 and 20769 of 2024
Cyriloose ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar,
The District Registrar Office,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
The Sub Register Office,
Karungal,
Kanyakumari District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the
records on the file of the 1st respondent pertaining to the proceeding No.
3179/A/2024 dated 04.09.2024 and the check slip issued by the 2nd respondent
Refusal No.RFL/Karundal/59/2024 dated 03.09.2024 and to quash the same
and consequently direct the 2nd respondent to register the sale deed presented
by the petitioner on 03.09.2024 within a time frame that may be fixed by this
Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/5
W.P(MD)No.24443 of 2024
For Petitioner : Mr.S.C.Herold Singh
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj
Special Government Pleader
ORDER
Challenge has been made to the refusal check slip issued by the
second respondent dated 03.09.2024.
2.Mr.P.Subbaraj, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice for
the respondents. By consent of both parties, this writ petition is taken up for
final disposal.
3.It is the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of
the subject property. The petitioner executed a sale deed with regard to that
property to one Sahaya Edwin Prabakar and presented the same for registration
on 03.09.2024. However, the same was refused to be registered on the ground
that the original document has not been produced. Therefore, challenging the
same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
4.The issue raised in this Writ Petition is no longer res-integra, in
view of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Subramani vs. the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Sub Registrar and others [WP.No.11056 of 2024, dated 26.04.2024], in which
it has been held as follows:
“c. With regard to the refusal on the absence of parent
document, this Court in the case of K.S. Vijayendran v. The
Inspector General of Registration reported in (2011) 2 LW 648,
Lakshmi Ammal v. The Sub Registrar, Villivakkam reported in 2015
SCC OnLine Mad 5868 and C. Moorthy v. Sub Registrar
Aruppukottai reported in 2018 SCC OnLine Mad 3898, it was held
that absence of a parent document is no ground to refuse
registration. Pursuant to these judgments, sub-rule XX was
introduced in Rule 162 authorizing the Sub-Registrar to refuse
registration for non-production of the original title deed as required
by Rule 55-A. 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, 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.
Considering the above settled position of law, the Registrar
cannot refuse to register the document merely on the ground of non
production of parent document.”
5.In such view of the matter, the refusal made by the second
respondent on the ground that original document has not been produced, cannot
be sustained in the eye of law. Therefore, the same is liable to be quashed,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
accordingly, it is quashed. This Writ Petition is allowed with a direction to the
second respondent to register the document presented by the petitioner, within a
period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
17.10.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
ta
To
1.The District Registrar,
The District Registrar Office,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
The Sub Register Office,
Karungal,
Kanyakumari District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
ta
17.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
