Orissa High Court
Babula Sahu And Another vs State Of Odisha And Others ... Opposite ... on 22 September, 2025
ORISSA HIGH COURT : CUTTACK
WP(C) No.23918 of 2025
An application under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution
of India.
Babula Sahu and another ... Petitioners
-VERSUS-
State of Odisha and others ... Opposite Parties.
Counsel appeared for the parties:
For the Petitioner : Mr. B.B. Panda, Advocate.
For the Opposite Parties : Mr. T. Kumar, Addl. Standing
Counsel (for the State)
P R E S E N T:
HONOURABLE
MR. JUSTICE ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
JUDGMENT
Date of hearing : 22.09.2025 / date of judgment : 22.09.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the
Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioners praying
for directing the District Sub-Registrar, Kandhamal(Opposite Party
No.4) to register the deed for sale of the petitioners, which was
presented by them (petitioners) before the Opposite Party No.4 on
dated 17.04.2025 on full payment of e-stamp duties, as, till yet, since
17.04.2025, the District Sub-Registrar, Kandhamal(Opposite Party
No.4) is not registering the same, though the said deed for sale has
been kept by the Opposite Party No.4.
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned
Additional Standing Counsel for the State.
3. As per the provisions of law envisaged in Section 71 of the
Indian Registration Act, 1908, the District Sub-Registrar,
Kandhamal has no authority under law to retain the deed for sale
with him for an indefinite period after its acceptance for registration
without passing any order for non-registration of the same.
4. For which, the retention of the deed for sale of the petitioners
by the District Sub-Registrar, Kandhamal(Opposite Party No.4) with
him since 17.04.2025 without registering the same and without
passing any order under Section 71 of the Registration Act, 1908 is
not inconformity with law.
5. Therefore, necessary directions can be given to the District
Sub-Registrar, Kandhamal(Opposite Party No.4), through this writ
petition filed by the petitioners to Act upon the said deed for sale of
petitioners(which has been kept by the Opposite Party No.4 with him
since 17.04.2025), as per the Indian Registration Act, 1908 and the
Indian Registration Rules, on the very date of production of the
certified copy of this judgment.
6. Therefore, there is merit in this writ petition filed by the
petitioners. The same is to be allowed.
7. In the result, this writ petition filed by the petitioners is
allowed.
8. The District Sub-Register, Kandhamal(Opposite Party No.4) is
directed to act upon the deed for sale(which was presented by the
petitioners on dated 17.04.2025) on the very same day of production
of the certified copy of this judgment by the petitioners before
him(Opposite Party No.4) as per Indian Registration Act, 1908 and
the Registration Rule, 1988.
9. As such, this writ petition filed by the petitioner is disposed of
finally.
(A.C. BEHERA)
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 22nd of September, 2025/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
