Orissa High Court
Rama Chandra Acharya And Others vs State Of Odisha And Others ... Opposite ... on 25 November, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.30020 of 2025
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution
of India.
Rama Chandra Acharya and others ... Petitioners
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha and others ... Opposite Parties.
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioners : Mr. P.K. Sahoo, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. T. Kumar,
Learned Additional Standing
Counsel (for the State)
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 25.11.2025 / date of judgment : 25.11.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioners under
Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 praying for
directing the District Sub-Registrar, Barang(Opposite Party No.4) to
receive the deed for sale of the petitioners and to register the same,
as the Opposite Party No.4 orally refused to receive the said deed of
the petitioner for registration.
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Standing Counsel for the State.
3. The law is very much clear that, the Sub-Registrars like
Opposite Party No.4(District Sub-Registrar, Barang in the District of
Cuttack) cannot orally refuse to receive any document, when the
same is presented for registration. He/she is either to register the
document or to refuse to register the same indicating the reasons in
writing for its non-registration, if that document is not legally fit for
registration.
According to The Registration Act, 1908 and The Orissa
Registration Rules, 1988, when a document is presented before the
Sub-registrar for registration, it is the duty of the Sub-Registrar to
receive the same, but if the said document is not in compliance with
the provisions of law, the Sub-Registrar may refuse to accept that
document for registration assigning the reasons in writing about such
refusal.
4. On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been
clarified in a decision between North East Infrastructure Private
Limited and Ors. vrs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and Ors.
reported in 2025 (2) Civ.C.C. 220 (Andhra Pradesh) and in a case
between Antaryami Nayak vrs. State of Odisha & Others in WP(C)
No.18548 of 2025 decided on 11.07.2025 that,
"the Sub-Registrar/Registrar, cannot orally refuse to receive the document
and would consider the fitness of it for registration or otherwise. Section 71
of the Registration Act, 1908 empowers the Registration Authorities to
receive a document which is presented for registration and process the same."
5. Therefore, the oral refusal of the District Sub-Registrar,
Barang(Opposite Party No.4) to receive the deed for sale of the
petitioners for registration cannot be held legal in view of the
propositions of law enunciated in the ratio of the above decision.
For which, there is no justification under law to disallow
the writ petition filed by the petitioners.
6. Therefore, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is to be
allowed.
7. In the result, the writ petition filed by the petitioners is
allowed.
The District Sub-Registrar, Barang(Opposite Party No.4) is
directed to receive the deed for sale of the petitioners, if the same
is presented by the petitioners annexing the certified copy of this
judgment for registration and to act upon the same as per The
Registration Act, 1908 and The Orissa Registration Rules, 1988.
If the said deed is registered, then, after registration of the
same, the District Sub-Registrar, Barang(Opposite Party No.4) shall
return that sale deed to the petitioners within 3(three) days of its
registration after complying all the formalities thereof as per the
Rule 100 of The Orissa Registration Rules, 1988 and Notification
No.2915 dated 02.08.2017 of I.G.R of Odisha.
8. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioners is disposed
of finally.
(A.C. BEHERA)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 25th of November, 2025/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
