Madras High Court
Manoj Kumar vs The District Registrar on 28 October, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S. M. Subramaniam, Mohammed Shaffiq
2025:MHC:2543
WA No. 2899 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 28-10-2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE S. M. SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ
WA No. 2899 of 2025
Manoj Kumar
Appellant(s)
Vs
1.The District Registrar,
Virudhachalam,
Virudhachalam District.
2.The Sub-Registrar,
Sirupakkam,
Virudhachalam District.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, to set aside the order
dated 21.10.2024 in WP No.30818 of 2024 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant(s): Ms.B. Dharani
For Respondent(s): Mr.U.Baranidharan
Special Government Pleader
Page No.1 of 13
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
WA No. 2899 of 2025
JUDGMENT
(Judgment was delivered by S.M.Subramaniam J.)
Under assail is the writ order dated 21.10.2024 passed in W.P.No.30818
of 2024. The writ petitioner is the appellant before this Court.
Brief Facts of the Case:
2. Appellant presented a settlement deed for registration under the
Registration Act, 1908, [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act']. The Registering
Authority/Sub-Registrar refused to register the instrument on the ground that
another person is in possession of a document relating to the same schedule
property. Registering Authority has stated that presentant of the document
does not have an absolute right. Secondly, as per document relied on,
presentant holds one-fourth share in schedule property described in the
instrument. Thus refusal check slip issued came to be challenged in the writ
proceedings. Writ Court dismissed the writ petition on merits.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
3. Findings of the Writ Court indicates that appellant does not have an
absolute right over subject property.
Availability of Alternate Remedy and Writ Courts' Role:
4. This Court is of the considered view that Writ Court cannot decide
disputed facts relating to civil rights. Power of judicial review of High Court
under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is to ensure the processes
through which a decision has been taken are in consonance with statutes and
rules, but not the decision itself. Therefore, any findings touching upon civil
rights in a writ order may cause prejudice to parties litigating civil rights and
result in miscarriage of justice. Parties, at the first instance are expected to
exhaust statutory remedy contemplated under the Act and in the present case,
the scheme contemplated under the Registration Act is to be scrupulously
followed.
5. Documents presented for registration are scrutinized by Registering
Authority, and a decision is taken either to register the document or refuse
registration. A slip has been issued to presentant of the document. Refusal slip
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
per se would not provide a cause to institute a writ proceeding, since an
adjudication/inquiry is contemplated under Section 71 of the Registration Act
before Registering Authority.
6. Part XII of Registration Act provides “Of Refusal to Register”. Section
71 of the Act enumerates “Reasons for refusal to register to be recorded.—(1)
Every Sub-Registrar refusing to register a document, except on the ground
that the property to which it relates is not situate within his sub-district, shall
make an order of refusal and record his reasons for such order in his Book
No.2, and endorse the words “registration refused” on the document; and, on
application made by any person executing or claiming under the document,
shall, without payment and unnecessary delay, give him a copy of the reasons
so recorded. (2) No registering officer shall accept for registration a document
so endorsed unless and until, under the provisions hereinafter contained, the
document is directed to be registered”.
7. A cursory reading of above provision would indicate that Registering
Authority shall make an order of refusal and record reasons in Book No.2, and
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
endorse the words “registration refused” on the document. Any person on
receipt of refusal slip is at liberty to submit explanations, along with
documents, if any to the Registering Authority, who in turn has to conduct an
inquiry by affording opportunity to the presentant/representative of document.
After conducting inquiry, Registering Authority has to register the document or
pass a reasoned order for refusal to register under Section 71 of the
Registration Act.
8. If the document presented is refused and a reasoned order refusing
to register is passed, the said order is appealable under Section 72 of the
Registration Act. Section 72 contemplates “Appeal to Registrar from orders of
Sub-Registrar refusing registration on ground other than denial of execution”.
9. Therefore, an aggrieved person may prefer an appeal under Section
72 before District Registrar to conduct an inquiry, by affording an opportunity
to parties, and thereafter pass final orders, issuing directions to Registering
Authority to register the document or affirm refusal order passed by
Registering Authority under Section 71 of the Act.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
10. Section 77 of the Registration Act, 1908, denotes “Suit in case of
order of refusal by Registrar.—(1) Where the Registrar refuses to order the
document to be registered, under Section 72 or a decree Section 76, any
person claiming under such document, or his representative, assign or agent,
may, within thirty days after the making of the order of refusal, institute in the
Civil Court, within the local limits of whose original jurisdiction is situate the
office in which the document is sought to be registered, a suit for a decree
directing the document to be registered in such office if it be duly presented for
registration within thirty days after the passing of such decree. (2) The
provisions contained in sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 75 shall, mutatis
mutandis, apply to all documents presented for registration in accordance with
any such decree, and, notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, the
documents shall be receivable in evidence in such suit”.
11. Under Section 77 of the Act, an aggrieved person from and out of
the orders passed by Registering Authority and Appellate Authority under
Sections 71 and 72 respectively may institute a civil suit for appropriate relief
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
before Civil Court within local limits of whose original jurisdiction the office in
which document is sought to be registered. A suit for a decree directing
document to be registered may be sought for. Scheme under Registration Act
provides an effective mechanism for redressal of grievances against refusal of
registration of a document by the Registering Authority under the Act.
Exhausting alternate remedy contemplated under the Act is of paramount
importance.
12. Factual findings by Registering Authority and Appellate Authority
could be of greater assistance to Courts in exercising powers to render justice
to litigants. The legislative intention in providing an alternate remedy under the
Act need not be undermined by Courts by entertaining writ petitions for
adjudication of disputed issues under Article 226 of the Constitution of India,
which is not desirable.
Registering Authorities' Role Confined to Procedural Compliance:
13. Pertinently, at the initial stage of issuance of a refusal slip by
Registering Authority, civil rights or right of the presentant of a document for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
registration cannot be determined either by Registering Authority or by Writ
Court. It is a preliminary stage, where they are bound to call for explanation
from the presentant of document, along with supportive documents, if any, and
an adjudicatory process is to be undertaken to arrive a final decision, enabling
an aggrieved person to approach the Appellate Authority and thereafter Civil
Court under Sections 72 and 77 of the Act respectively.
14. Under Sections 71 and 72 of the Registration Act, neither the
Registering Authority nor the Appellate Authority is empowered to decide title,
ownership, or civil rights between the parties. Extent of inquiry is to be
confined so as to find out whether document presented under the Act can be
registered or to be refused. Therefore, Registering Authority is not empowered
to go into merits of the case and decide title, ownership, or civil rights between
the parties.
15. Any inquiry or findings made thereunder are to be confined only to
an extent of registration of a document, and findings by Registering Authority
or Appellate Authority cannot be taken into consideration for the purpose
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
determining civil rights between the parties. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of
India in K.Gopi vs. The Sub Registrar and Others , paragraph 15 of the
judgment reads as under:
“15. The registering officer is not concerned with
the title held by the executant. He has no adjudicatory
power to decide whether the executant has any title.
Even if an executant executes a sale deed or a lease in
respect of a land in respect of which he has no title, the
registering officer cannot refuse to register the document
if all the procedural compliances are made and the
necessary stamp duty as well as registration charges/fee
are paid. We may note here that under the scheme of the
1908 Act, it is not the function of the Sub-Registrar or
Registering Authority to ascertain whether the vendor has
title to the property which he is seeking to transfer. Once
the registering authority is satisfied that the parties to the
document are present before him and the parties admit
execution thereof before him, subject to making
procedural compliances as narrated above, the
document must be registered. The execution and
registration of a document have the effect of transferring
only those rights, if any, that the executant possesses. If
the executant has no right, title, or interest in the
1 2025 INSC 462
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
property, the registered document cannot effect any
transfer.”
16. Therefore, it is amply clear that the competent authorities under
Registration Act have no jurisdiction to adjudicate title, ownership, or decide
civil rights between parties. Any reference or findings made relating to a
document presented for registration or supportive documents are considered
only for the limited purpose of establishing a right to register document under
the Registration Act. Any findings made by competent authority would not
affect the rights of parties to establish their case independently before Civil
Courts based on documents and evidences available on record.
17. In W.P.No.30818 of 2024, Writ Court has considered the merits and
made a finding, touching upon rights of parties, which would cause prejudice
to them or may result in miscarriage of justice. Thus, this Court is not inclined
to interfere with writ order impugned. Consequently, the writ order dated
21.10.2024 in W.P.No.30818 of 2024 stands confirmed.
18. An appeal or suit instituted shall be decided independently on merits
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
and based on documents and evidences. It is needless to state that
Registering Authority or Appellate Authority on receipt of explanation have to
decide the issues as expeditiously as possible since long delay would affect
the rights of parties to get their documents registered under the Registration
Act. Therefore, the authorities are expected to perform their duties vigilantly
and within a reasonable period of time.
19. With the above observations, the Writ Appeal stands dismissed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
(S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.)(MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.)
28-10-2025
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
Jeni
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
1.The District Registrar
Virudhachalam,
Virudhachalam District.
2.The Sub Registrar
Sirupakkam,
Virudhachalam District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM J.
AND
MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ J.
Jeni
28-10-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 06/11/2025 09:26:18 pm )
