Madras High Court
T.Mohan vs The Sub-Registrar on 23 October, 2024
W.P.No.30977 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 23.10.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.SOUNTHAR
W.P.No.30977 of 2024
T.Mohan ... Petitioner
vs.
The Sub-Registrar,
Vembakkam Sub Registrar Office,
Tiruvannamalai District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records
relating to the Refusal Check Slip in RFL / Vembakkam / 71 / 2024 dated
10.09.2024 issued by the respondent herein, quash the same and
consequently direct the respondent herein to register the Decree and
Judgment in OS No.97/2023 dated 01.12.2023 passed by the learned
Principal District Munsif, Cheyyar, Tiruvannamalai District.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Mageshkumar
For Respondent : Mr.M.Shahjahan
Special Government Pleader
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.30977 of 2024
ORDER
By consent of both the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as
well as respondent, this writ petition is disposed of at the admission stage
itself.
2. Aggrieved by the impugned Refusal Check Slip in RFL /
Vembakkam / 71 / 2024 dated 10.09.2024 issued by the respondent refusing
to register the decree passed by the Civil Court in O.S.No.97 of 2023, dated
01.12.2023 presented for registration, the petitioner has come before this
Court.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner acquired right over
1.22 acres of land in Survey No.416/1B1 and 69 cents of land in Survey
No.416/1A1 in North Iluppai Village, Vembakkam Taluk, Tiruvannamalai
District under a Partition Deed dated 16.05.2014. Since one Chandirasekhar
and Vijayagamoorthy attempted to interfere with petitioner's peaceful
possession, he filed a suit for permanent injunction against them in
O.S.No.97 of 2023 on the file of Principal District Munsif Court, Cheyyar,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tiruvannamalai District. The suit was decreed exparte on 01.12.2023. The
petitioner wanted to register the judgment and decree passed in the suit and
presented the same before the respondent. However, the respondent refused
registration on the ground that it does not involve any transfer of interest in
immovable property and aggrieved by the same, the petitioner has come
before this Court.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the
reasoning given by the respondent for refusing registration of judgment and
decree passed by the Civil Court is untenable in law.
5. Mr.M.Shahjahan, learned Special Government Pleader, who is
taking notice for the respondent would submit that the decree sought to be
registered is only an injunction decree and no transfer of property had taken
place under the document and therefore, the respondent refused registration.
6. The civil suit was filed by the petitioner in respect of immovable
property mentioned above and he obtained an ex parte decree for injunction.
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the decree is
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
still in force. The defendants in the suit have not filed any petition to set
aside the ex parte decree. The said statement is recorded.
7. A perusal of Section 17 of the Indian Registration Act, 1908,
would suggest that the registration of judgment and orders passed by the
Civil Court is optional one in view of Section 17(2)(vi) of Registration Act,
1908. The respondent is unable to point out any provision in the
Registration Act, creating specific bar for registration of Civil Court's order
and decree from registration on the ground that it does not involve any
transfer of interest in immovable property. The decree for injunction granted
in favour of the petitioner will certainly implies the possession of the
petitioner over the immovable property mentioned above.
8. In such circumstances, the reasoning given by the respondent for
refusing registration is unsustainable in law and the same is against Section
17(2)(vi) of Registration Act, 1908. Accordingly, the impugned Refusal
Check Slip in RFL / Vembakkam / 71 / 2024 dated 10.09.2024 issued by the
respondent is set aside and the writ petition stands allowed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9. The petitioner is directed to represent the document before the
respondent along with affidavit mentioning that the judgment and decree
passed by the Civil Court is still effective, within a period of two weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The respondent shall consider
the same for registration, if it is otherwise in order. No costs.
23.10.2024
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order:Yes/No
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
dm
To
The Sub-Registrar,
Vembakkam Sub Registrar Office,
Tiruvannamalai District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.SOUNTHAR, J.
dm
23.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
