Orissa High Court
Guru Pradhan vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 26 September, 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
W.P.(C) No.26114 of 2025
(An application under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950)
Guru Pradhan .... Petitioner
-versus-
State of Odisha and others .... Opposite Parties
Appeared in this case by Hybrid Arrangement
(Virtual/Physical Mode):
For Petitioner - Mr. U.K. Samal,
Advocate.
For Opposite Parties- Smt. J. Sahoo,
Addl. Sanding Counsel
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.C.BEHERA
Date of Hearing :26.09.2025 :: Date of Judgment :26.09.2025
A.C. Behera, J. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner under Articles
226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 praying for directing the
Sub-Registrar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) in the district of
Jharsuguda to accept the deed for sale of the petitioner for registration,
because, the Sub-Registrar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) orally
refused to receive the deed for sale of the petitioner stating that, the
petitioner is wanting to sell his joint and undivided properties without the
Page 1 of 5
consent and signatures of his co-sharers, for which, he(Opposite Party
No.3) will not receive that deed for sale of the petitioner.
2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned
Additional Sanding Counsel for the Opposite Parties.
3. The law is very much clear that, Sub-Registrars cannot orally
refuse to receive any deed for sale, when the same is presented for
registration. The Sub-Registrars including Opposite Party No.3 are bound
to receive the deed presented for registration and after receiving the deed,
they(Sub-Registrars) may register the deed or to refuse to register the
same assigning reasons for non-registration of the same, if that deed is
not legally fit for registration.
4. According to The Registration Act, 1908 and The Orissa
Registration Rules, 1988, when a document is presented for registration,
it is the duty of the Sub-Registrar to receive the same, but, if the said
document is not fit as per law to be registered, then, the Sub-Registrar
may refuse to register the same assigning the reasons in writing for its
non-registration.
5. 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
Page 2 of 5
Vs. 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, he/she is to receive the same. If that
document is not legally fit for registration, then, he/she may
refuse to register the same assigning reasons in writing for
its non-registration.
6. Section 44 of the T.P. Act, 1882 provides inherent right/power
to the co-sharer of a joint property like the petitioner in this writ
petition to transfer/alienate his undivided share in his joint property
without the consent of his co-sharer or co-sharers and the Sub-
Registrars including Opposite Party No.3 has no power to refuse to
receive the deed, if the same is presented for registration by a co-
sharer like the petitioner in this matter at hand, even without the
consent and signatures of his co-sharers as vendors with the petitioner.
Because, as per law, every land owner like the petitioner has his
inherent right under Section 44 of the T.P. Act, 1882 to alienate his
interest in the joint and undivided properties. Any instruction or
circular issued by the Government cannot prohibit the land owner
(who is the master of his own land) from alienating his share and
interest in the joint and undivided property without the consent and
signatures of his co-owners (co-sharers). Because, any circular or
notification of the Government contrary to the statutory provisions
cannot nullify the statutory rights of the land owner for alienation of
his undivided interest in the joint and undivided properties.
On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in
the decision between Damodar Mishra Vs. State of Odisha and Others
decided on 03.04.2025 in WP(C) No.4340 of 2025, wherein, it has been
held that,
As per Section 44 of the T.P. Act, 1882, co-
sharers/co-owners have their inherent right to alienate
their shares/interests in the Joint and Undivided
properties to the extent of their share. Therefore, even
there will be any sale of specific portion of land in the
joint and undivided properties by co-owners of the same
indicating boundaries thereof, still then, the said
transfer/sale would be deemed as a transfer of share of
the vendor in the said joint and undivided property. Any
executive instruction or circular issued by any authority
including Government contrary to the statutory law
envisaged under Section 44 of the T.P. Act, 1882
restricting co-owners/co-sharers to alienate their
undivided shares/interests in their joint and undivided
property shall be deemed as non-est. Because, executive
instructions and circulars have no applicability, where
statutory law governs the field.
7. So, by applying the propositions of law as clarified in the ratio of
the above decisions and also taking the Rule 147 of The Orissa
Registration Rules, 1988 into account, it is felt proper to dispose of this
writ petition finally directing the Sub-Registrar, Lakhanpur (Opposite
Party No.3) to receive the deed for sale of the petitioner for alienation of
his shares in the plots covered in his deed for sale without indicating the
sale of any specific portion of the said plot and without indicating the
boundaries thereof, but only indicating the alienation of his share/interest
therein.
On presentation of the said deed for sale of the petitioner annexing
the certified copy of this Judgment, the Sub-Registrar, Lakhanpur
(Opposite Party No.3) shall act upon the same as per The Indian
Registration Act, 1908 and The Orissa Registration Rules, 1988 in
accordance with the principles of law enunciated in the ratio of the above
decision between Damodar Mishra Vs. State of Odisha & Others
decided on 03.04.2025 in WP(C) No.4340 of 2025.
If the said deed is registered, then, after registration of the same,
the Sub-Registrar, Lakhanpur (Opposite Party No.3) shall return that
registered sale deed to the petitioner 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 petitioner is disposed of
finally.
(A.C. Behera),
Judge
Orissa High Court, Cuttack
The 26th of September, 2025/ Jagabandhu, P.A.
Designation: Personal Assistant
