Madras High Court
T.Vijayakumar vs The Sub-Registrar on 25 September, 2024
Author: N.Sathish Kumar
Bench: N.Sathish Kumar
W.P.(MD)No.18795 of 2023
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 25.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.(MD)No.18795 of 2023
and W.M.P.(MD)No.15613 of 2023
T.Vijayakumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Sub-Registrar,
Sub-Registrar Office,
Karundhattankudi,
Thiruvaiyaur Taluk,
Tanjore District.
2.Karthikeyan .... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the
records relating to 1st respondent proceedings made in Refusal Check Slip
RFL/Karuthattankudi/325/2022, dated on 03.06.2022 quash the same, and further
direct him to register the sale deed pertaining to property situated at Tanjore
District, Karundhattangudi Sub Registration District, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk,
Mankarambai Village, Punjai S.F.No. 142/3, New S.F.No.142/3E, admeasuring
1216 square feet, within a stipulated period as may be fixed by this Court.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.18795 of 2023
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Sundar
For Respondents : Mr.P.Subbaraj,
Spl. Govt. Pleader for R1
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking for issuance of a Writ of
Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to 1st respondent
proceedings made in Refusal Check Slip RFL/Karuthattankudi/325/2022, dated on
03.06.2022 quash the same, and further direct him to register the sale deed
pertaining to property situated at Tanjore District, Karundhattangudi Sub
Registration District, Thiruvaiyaru Taluk, Mankarambai Village, Punjai S.F.No.
142/3, New S.F.No.142/3E, admeasuring 1216 square feet, within a stipulated
period as may be fixed by this Court.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and perused the materials
available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. It is the case of the writ petitioner that the petitioner's father has
executed a settlement deed in favour of the petitioner. Pursuant to the same, the
petitioner has decided to sell a portion of the said land and he executed a sale deed
in favour of the 2nd respondent. When the petitioner has presented the said sale
deed for registration, the same was refused to be registered on the ground that an
objection petition has been received, as if the subject property has been mentioned
as ancestral property and therefore, enquiry has to be conducted. Challenging the
same, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.
4. 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 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 aspect has been elaborately dealt by this Court in Subramani Vs. 1.The Sub-
Registrar, Office of the SubRegistrar, 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 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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
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 settled position of law, the document cannot be refused to be
registered on the basis of a protest petition. Hence, the impugned Order has to be
quashed.
5. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed and the impugned Order
passed by the first respondent dated 03.06.2022 is quashed and the first
respondent is directed to register the sale deed presented by the petitioner within a
period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
25.09.2024
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
vsm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
The Sub-Registrar,
Sub-Registrar Office,
Karundhattankudi,
Thiruvaiyaur Taluk,
Tanjore District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N.SATHISH KUMAR, J.
vsm
25.09.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
