Madras High Court
K.P.Raja vs The District Registrar on 4 September, 2025
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam, C.Saravanan
W.A.No.2202 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 04.09.2025
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN
W.A.No.2202 of 2024
K.P.Raja,
S/o.K.T.Ponnusamy Gounder,
Periyakurumbapalayam,
Kurichi Village,
Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District. ... Appellant / Petitioner
Vs.
1.The District Registrar,
Registration Department,
District Registration Office,
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Ammapettai Registration Office,
Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District. ... Respondents / Respondents
Prayer: Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the Order dated
04.03.2024 passed in W.P.No.5661 of 2024.
For Appellant : Mr.S.P.Yuaraj
For Respondents : Mr.U.Baranidharan
Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
The Appellant herein instituted writ proceedings challenging the refusal
check slip dated 29.11.2023 issued by the 2nd Respondent, refusing to register
the documents presented by the Appellant/Writ Petitioner for registration of
Partition Deed.
2. The Appellant/Writ Petitioner presented the documents for registration
on 29.11.2023. However, the Registering Authority refused to register the same
on the ground that the Appellant/Writ Petitioner failed to produce the Original
Title Deed (Original Parent Document), which is required as per Rule 55-A of
Registration Rules, 1908.
3. The Rule contemplates that the Original Title Deed (Original Parent
Document) has to be produced at the time of registration by the presentant.
However, in certain cases, old Original Title Deed (Original Parent Document)
may not be available and the Court adopted a pragmatic approach interpreting
the rule, that it would suffice if the certified copy of the Title Deed has been
produced by the presentant for registration of documents under the Registration
Act, 1908.
4. The said position has been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
case of “K.Gopi Vs. Sub-Registrar and others, reported in 2025 SCC OnLine
SC 740/2025 (2) CTC 777”. In Paragraph Nos.13 to 17, the Hon'ble Supreme
Court held as under:-
“13. In contrast, Rule 55A empowers the registering officer to refuse
registration unless the presentant produces the original deed by
which the executant acquired rights over the subject property
and an encumbrance certificate pertaining to the property,
obtained within ten days from the date of presentation. If the
original deed is not available due to its antiquity, the
registration of the presented document will be refused unless the
presenter produces a revenue record that evidences the
executant's right over the subject property. If the original deed
is lost, the document cannot be registered unless a non-
traceable certificate is issued by the police department along
with an advertisement published in the local newspaper, giving
notice of the loss of the previous original deed.
14. In short, Rule 55A provides that unless documents are produced
to prove that the executant has a right in respect of the property
subject matter of the instrument, the registration of the same
shall be refused. Thus, if a sale deed is presented for
registration, documents must be produced to demonstrate that
the executant has acquired ownership of the property. In a
sense, power has been conferred on the registering officer to
verify the title of the executant. Unless documents are produced
evidencing title as required by Rule 55A(i), registration of the
sale deed shall be refused.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
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 property, the registered document cannot
effect any transfer.
16. Therefore, assuming that there is a power under Section 69 of
the 1908 Act to frame the Rules, Rule 55A(i) is inconsistent with
the provisions of the 1908 Act. Due to the inconsistency, Rule
55A(i) will have to be declared ultra vires the 1908 Act. The
rule-making power under Section 69 cannot be exercised to
make a Rule that is inconsistent with the provisions of the 1908
Act. Rule 55A(i) is accordingly declared as ultra vires the 1908
Act.
17. As the writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed by the
High Court, relying on Rule 55A(i), and since Rule 55A(i) is
held to be invalid, the impugned judgments must be quashed
and set aside. Ordered accordingly.”
5. Pursuant to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, a Circular has
been issued by the Registration Department in Lr.No.44420/C1/2024 dated
28.04.2025. The relevant portion of the Circular is extracted hereunder:-
“Circular
Lr.No.44420/C1/2024. DT. 28.04.2025
.....
(4) In other words the Registering Officer shall not insist
production of Original Previous documents or Non-Traceable
Certificate from the Police Department or Encumbrance
Certificate and other Revenue details from the Registrants.”
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
6. Therefore, it would be suffice if the certified copy of the Title Deed has
been produced by the presentant before the Registering Authority for
registration of documents.
7. Learned counsel for the Appellant/Petitioner would submit that the
certified copy of the Title Deed has been produced before the Registering
Authority even at the time of presenting the documents under Section 17 of the
Registration Act, 1908.
8. That being so, the Impugned Order of the Writ Court as well as the
refusal check slip are set aside and the Writ Appeal stands allowed.
9. The Appellant/Writ Petitioner is at liberty to approach the Registering
Authority and produce the certified copy of the Title Deed and comply with the
other requirements as contemplated under the Registration Act and Rules, 1908.
10. On such compliance, the Registering Authority is directed to register
the document by following the procedures. No costs.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
[S.M.S., J.] [C.S.N., J.]
04.09.2025
Neutral Citation : Yes / No
arb
To:
1.The District Registrar,
Registration Department,
District Registration Office,
Erode District.
2.The Sub Registrar,
Ammapettai Registration Office,
Bhavani Taluk,
Erode District.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
and
C.SARAVANAN, J.
arb
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
04.09.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 11/09/2025 11:46:01 am )
